[At-Large] IGO names: is this worth war?
julf at julf.com
Tue Nov 1 15:50:20 UTC 2016
> At the threat of being an ICANN heretic (and it wouldn't be the first
> time), I'm on the side of the governments here.
Unfortunately, as so often with ICANN, the battle is not about
the actual IGO name issue, but about the proper process to
determine it. What this really is about is the way the organisations
refused to participate in the proper GNSO process (despite being
invited to), but instead going to GAC and the ICANN board,
as they thought that would be an easier way to get what they
wanted. Do we want to encourage using government power as a
leverage to bypass multistakeholder community processes?
[Disclosure: I sit on the GNSO council, appointed by the NomCom. I have
no business connection with the "domain industry"]
More information about the At-Large