[At-Large] [ALAC] R: IGO names: is this worth war?

Evan Leibovitch evan at telly.org
Sat Nov 5 02:13:04 UTC 2016

On 5 November 2016 at 02:47, <bzs at theworld.com> wrote:

> The problem in this discusssion is there is no meeting of the minds on
> what the problem really is.

​I argree fully. But the current process forces everything to fit into the
GNSO's assumptions and worldview​. This forces outsider to either bend
their message/request to fit with that worldview (in which case the
resolution is also unsatisfactory) or dispense with the process altogether
(which is at the core of the current "why won't _they_ participate in _our_
process" whinging).

The current design of the PDP is inherently biased against participants
that are not GNSO stakeholder groups. Until this is addressed I anticipate
an increase in the number (and intensity) of disputes that can't be
addressed by ICANN processes in a manner suitable to all parties. This will
inevitably lead to more circumvention attempts, which threatens stability.

- Evan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/attachments/20161105/88e136f6/attachment.html>

More information about the At-Large mailing list