[NA-Discuss] CALL FOR MEMBERS: At-Large Public Interest Working Group
evanleibovitch at gmail.com
Mon Apr 11 10:33:26 UTC 2016
1) It's hard to be simultaneously "concise" and "wide open". Maybe that's
just a personal inability to understand.
2) "Issues related to the public interest in the context of ICANN and the
manner in which end users are impacted": To me this is not a working group,
function of At-Large, ALAC and the RALOs. Why the heck else does this
infrastructure exist? All the outreach and capacity building stuff is just
foundational work designed to serve the above objective. If not we're all
wasting our time.
3) Both of you (Alan and Wolf) have been around the ICANN universe enough
to know that
defining "public interest" here is a rhetorical black hole from which it
is difficult to emerge.
Vested interests insist they are just members of that same public.
And some in the GAC believe that it is governments who advance the public
. If the objective of the WG is to produce advice output for the rest of
ICANN rather than just for talking internally, these factors cannot be
Such concerns were in play back when Jean Jacques and I originally created
the FCWG. If you look at its charter and what it did
it seems that the objectives are very similar to this new WG (if not stated
the same way).
I certainly hope that this WG can follow up on the "R3" white paper
which IMO continues to have relevance in this area and directly addresses
the interface between ICANN, At-Large and the Global Public Interest.
IMO there is also significant overlap with the the regulatory issues WG
that I believe Holly leads.
On 9 Apr 2016, at 03:46, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
> Evan, perhaps you could be good enough to be more specific on which
> "remnants" you believe are missing from the new WG's mission, or
> perhaps should be used to flesh out the mission more fully.
> At this point, the mission is pretty concise and wide open: "This WG
> will discuss issues related to the public interest in the context of
> ICANN and the manner in which end users are impacted."
> At 08/04/2016 03:57 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> PS: It would probably be a good idea to roll the remnants of the
>> dormant Future Challanges WG into Wolf's Public Interest one, they
>> appear to share objectives. I will happily offer myself to be in the
>> group, but cannot promise significant capacity to participate.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NA-Discuss