- ALAC - lists.icann.org

Re: [ALAC] ALAC Moves to Renew JAS Charter
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Nov. 24, 2010

Nov. 24, 2010

Your thanks are most welcome and I have passed them on in c.c. to the Working list in this reply... Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) On 24 November 2010 22:35, Avri Doria <avri(a)acm.org> wrote: > Dear Cheryl, > > Please extend my thanks to ALAC for their unanimous support for the charter > proposal we presented. I am heartened by this show of support, not only for > the working group but for the work we doing to try and alleviate the > problems that would be faced by those with financial need, especially those > from from developing economies, in applying for a gTLD in the coming round. > > With thanks and best regards, > > Avri Doria > Co-chair Joint SO/AC Working Group on Support for New gTLD Applicants > > On 24 Nov 2010, at 11:56, ICANN At-Large Staff wrote: > > > Dear Avri, Dear Evan, > > > > The At-Large staff would like to inform you that the At-Large Advisory > Committee moved to renew the charter of the Joint SO/AC Working group on > support for new gTLD applicants. > > > > The motion was passed unanimously by the members of the ALAC at their > monthly teleconference on 23 November 2010. > > > > You find the Motion to Renew the JAS Charter attached to this mail. The > ALAC welcomes any comments the JAS may wish to make by reply. > > > > -- > > Regards, > > > > Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Gisella > Gruber-White > > ICANN At-Large Staff > > email: staff at atlarge.icann.org > > <Motion to renew JAS charter 23 November 2010.pdf> > >

1 0

Re: [ALAC] NCSG + ALAC => Cartagena
by Beau Brendler Nov. 22, 2010

Nov. 22, 2010

count me in...time for a unified front...going through "channels" doesn't work very well, though it's taken me perilously too long to figure that out -----Original Message----- >From: William Drake <william.drake(a)graduateinstitute.ch> >Sent: Nov 18, 2010 4:14 AM >To: ALAC Working List <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: [ALAC] NCSG + ALAC => Cartagena > >Hi > >Alan and I chatted a little about whether we should try to organize an ALAC/NCSG social thing in Cartagena, but then I was traveling with spotty connectivity for a couple weeks and didn't follow up. NCSG had it's monthly meeting the other night and people expressed interest, so now I'm circling back to see whether there's interest in ALAC too? Of course, if a whole evening with dinner is too much to squeeze in, we could just do an end of the work day pre-dinner meet in the hotel bar, like 6-8pm or whatever. > >Please cogitate and let me know? > >Thanks > >Bill > >Begin forwarded message: > >> From: William Drake <william.drake(a)graduateinstitute.ch> >> Date: October 30, 2010 8:40:54 AM GMT+02:00 >> To: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> >> Subject: Re: NCSG + ALAC => Cartagena >> >> Well, there are in fact some things on which coordination would be logical, but given the recurrent difficulty of organizing something and the perhaps related shadows of all the histories involving various individuals, I tend to think the most unifying approach is to avoid unified inter-org meetings, instead gather socially, and then the various pairs and such who work well together can socialize and later build on that. In other words, I think incremental, fragmentary trust/collaboration building is the way to lay a foundation from which broader comity and coordination can eventually evolve. And anyway, people like to party… >> >> Sat-Sun is GNSO stuff, Tuesdays is for tribes and loud music, Wed gala, Thursday people are often moving into see the town mode. So Monday is always the main option, at least on the NC side. But if memory serves ALAC folks often do ISOC stuff then, no? >> >> Anyway, with enough advanced warning I can probably sell Monday or Thursday night, or failing that just a end of the day drink in the hotel bar before people head to evening activities. Last time we waited until everyone already had plans. >> >> So poke around and let me know? >> >> BD >> >> On Oct 29, 2010, at 11:23 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >> >>> Certainly worth a try. I presume you are talking something more on the social side rather than a scheduled meeting - right? >>> >>> I know that we have some sort of ALAC or At-Large event on Thursday evening, so that reduces the number of possible times evenings to Monday and Tuesday (haven't heard if there is the becoming standard unbearably-loud-music-night this time). >>> >>> Alan >>> >>> At 29/10/2010 08:58 AM, William Drake wrote: >>>> Shall we try it again? It would seem particularly apt now that there's been various productive collaborations and some of the frictions are further in the past etc… >>>> >>>> BD > >*********************************************************** >William J. Drake >Senior Associate >Centre for International Governance >Graduate Institute of International and > Development Studies >Geneva, Switzerland >william.drake(a)graduateinstitute.ch >www.williamdrake.org >*********************************************************** > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > >At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org >ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac

3 3

NCSG + ALAC => Cartagena
by William Drake Nov. 20, 2010

Nov. 20, 2010

Hi Alan and I chatted a little about whether we should try to organize an ALAC/NCSG social thing in Cartagena, but then I was traveling with spotty connectivity for a couple weeks and didn't follow up. NCSG had it's monthly meeting the other night and people expressed interest, so now I'm circling back to see whether there's interest in ALAC too? Of course, if a whole evening with dinner is too much to squeeze in, we could just do an end of the work day pre-dinner meet in the hotel bar, like 6-8pm or whatever. Please cogitate and let me know? Thanks Bill Begin forwarded message: > From: William Drake <william.drake(a)graduateinstitute.ch> > Date: October 30, 2010 8:40:54 AM GMT+02:00 > To: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> > Subject: Re: NCSG + ALAC => Cartagena > > Well, there are in fact some things on which coordination would be logical, but given the recurrent difficulty of organizing something and the perhaps related shadows of all the histories involving various individuals, I tend to think the most unifying approach is to avoid unified inter-org meetings, instead gather socially, and then the various pairs and such who work well together can socialize and later build on that. In other words, I think incremental, fragmentary trust/collaboration building is the way to lay a foundation from which broader comity and coordination can eventually evolve. And anyway, people like to party… > > Sat-Sun is GNSO stuff, Tuesdays is for tribes and loud music, Wed gala, Thursday people are often moving into see the town mode. So Monday is always the main option, at least on the NC side. But if memory serves ALAC folks often do ISOC stuff then, no? > > Anyway, with enough advanced warning I can probably sell Monday or Thursday night, or failing that just a end of the day drink in the hotel bar before people head to evening activities. Last time we waited until everyone already had plans. > > So poke around and let me know? > > BD > > On Oct 29, 2010, at 11:23 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: > >> Certainly worth a try. I presume you are talking something more on the social side rather than a scheduled meeting - right? >> >> I know that we have some sort of ALAC or At-Large event on Thursday evening, so that reduces the number of possible times evenings to Monday and Tuesday (haven't heard if there is the becoming standard unbearably-loud-music-night this time). >> >> Alan >> >> At 29/10/2010 08:58 AM, William Drake wrote: >>> Shall we try it again? It would seem particularly apt now that there's been various productive collaborations and some of the frictions are further in the past etc… >>> >>> BD *********************************************************** William J. Drake Senior Associate Centre for International Governance Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Geneva, Switzerland william.drake(a)graduateinstitute.ch www.williamdrake.org ***********************************************************

2 1

Domain Tasting Declared Dead
by Alan Greenberg Nov. 19, 2010

Nov. 19, 2010

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-19nov10-en.htm Too bad the ALAC did not get credit for initiating this example that "illustrates the success of ICANN's consensus-driven, bottom-up policy development process". Alan

2 1

Re: [ALAC] [GTLD-WG] ICANN staff repudiates community call for change on Morality & Public Order
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Nov. 19, 2010

Nov. 19, 2010

Indeed Michael, I'm certainly expecting the next ICANN Meeting in Cartegena to be "very interesting indeed" and also trust that we as an At-Large Community and ALAC can be called upon to give what support and 'voice to opinion' on a number of issues I hope and trust will be raised... Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) On 15 November 2010 23:09, Michael Palage <mike(a)palage.com> wrote: > Evan, > > I share your concerns and just wanted to point out the irony of one of the > first proposed changes in AGv5: > > This Applicant Guidebook is the implementation of Board approved > consensus policy concerning the introduction of > new gTLDs, and has been revised extensively via public > comment and consultation over a two-year period. > > > While some potential applicants continue to hold out hope that the AG will > be finalized next month, the more likely reality is that the ICANN > community > will have a front row seat to the BIGGEST game of chicken between the ICANN > Board and the GAC. Unfortunately, at this late stage ICANN staff (Kurt > Pritz) has pretty much tuned out any further changes to the AG from the > private sector. > > It is now up to the GAC to hold the line and bring about any substantive > changes. In fact I would predict some of the fireworks to be on a scale not > seen since the good old days of 1999-2000. Although no one will discuss it > publicly, this game of chicken will also tie into the IANA contract which > expires Sept 30, 2011. > > The next 6-12 months should prove very interesting. > > Best regards, > > Michael > > > -----Original Message----- > From: gtld-wg-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [mailto:gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Evan > Leibovitch > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 3:15 AM > To: ICANN GTLD WG list; ICANN ALAC list > Subject: [GTLD-WG] ICANN staff repudiates community call for change on > Morality & Public Order > > Hello everyone, > > In the latest version of the new gTLD Applicant Guidebook, ICANN staff has > essentially screwed its community. > > Despite broad agreement reached across members of the GAC, GNSO and > At-Large > on issues related to Morality and Public Order -- and a report that was > unanimously endorsed by ALAC -- ICANN staff have explicitly rejected all of > our basic requests. Literally, only the most cosmetic -- changing the name > from "Morality and Public Order" to "Limited Public Interest" -- approach > was taken. > > The sub-contracted Dispute Resolution Service Provider -- now renamed the > Dispute Resolution Administrartor -- still exists, and many, many other > changes have been rejected. Not ignored, but explicitly rejected by staff. > > Here is the redlined version of the new document: > > http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-dispute-resolution-procedures > -redline-12nov10-en.pdf > > And here is the staff "explanatory notes" > > http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/explanatory-memo-morality-public-or > der-12nov10-en.pdf > > This is awful on so many levels. It asserts staff supremacy over the bottom > up process. It repudiates everything that ICANN claims to want in its > improvements of Accountability and Transparency. It asserts that on any > disagreement between staff and community, that staff should prevail. > > I am REALLY REALLY upset over this. This is an instance in which the GAC > and > ALAC were united in opposition to this completely odious piece of policy, > and staff have literally shrugged it off in the name is "risk management". > The only risk I see is the risk to ICANN policy staff making a mockery of > every principle ICANN *claims* to want to uphold. > > I am angry enough to want ALAC to go beyond merely announcing its > displeasure to the Board. I encourage everyone to real Milton Mueller's > blog > entry at > > http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2010/11/14/4679990.htmlwhi > le > contemplating what action to take. > > If we don't stand up for this, what is there to stand up for? ICANN created > At-Large to provide input on some of its most important policy and -- now > that we have provided it, in concert with other ICANN stakeholders -- its > staff have laughed it off. > > How strongly is At-Large going to fight this disgrace? What are the > candidates for Director going to propose? Where would the ATRT stand on a > process by which stakeholders can be stopped in their tracks by staff, > which > has threatened to drag out the process longer should we complain and make > us > the scapegoats of all the TLD applicants waiting for their chance? > > This is truly disgusting. > > - Evan > _______________________________________________ > GTLD-WG mailing list > GTLD-WG(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg > > Working Group direct URL: > https://st.icann.org/gnso-liaison/index.cgi?new_gtld_policy > > _______________________________________________ > GTLD-WG mailing list > GTLD-WG(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg > > Working Group direct URL: > https://st.icann.org/gnso-liaison/index.cgi?new_gtld_policy >

3 2

ICANN staff repudiates community call for change on Morality & Public Order
by Evan Leibovitch Nov. 18, 2010

Nov. 18, 2010

Hello everyone, In the latest version of the new gTLD Applicant Guidebook, ICANN staff has essentially screwed its community. Despite broad agreement reached across members of the GAC, GNSO and At-Large on issues related to Morality and Public Order -- and a report that was unanimously endorsed by ALAC -- ICANN staff have explicitly rejected all of our basic requests. Literally, only the most cosmetic -- changing the name from "Morality and Public Order" to "Limited Public Interest" -- approach was taken. The sub-contracted Dispute Resolution Service Provider -- now renamed the Dispute Resolution Administrartor -- still exists, and many, many other changes have been rejected. Not ignored, but explicitly rejected by staff. Here is the redlined version of the new document: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-dispute-resolution-procedure… And here is the staff "explanatory notes" http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/explanatory-memo-morality-public-o… This is awful on so many levels. It asserts staff supremacy over the bottom up process. It repudiates everything that ICANN claims to want in its improvements of Accountability and Transparency. It asserts that on any disagreement between staff and community, that staff should prevail. I am REALLY REALLY upset over this. This is an instance in which the GAC and ALAC were united in opposition to this completely odious piece of policy, and staff have literally shrugged it off in the name is "risk management". The only risk I see is the risk to ICANN policy staff making a mockery of every principle ICANN *claims* to want to uphold. I am angry enough to want ALAC to go beyond merely announcing its displeasure to the Board. I encourage everyone to real Milton Mueller's blog entry at http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2010/11/14/4679990.htmlwh… contemplating what action to take. If we don't stand up for this, what is there to stand up for? ICANN created At-Large to provide input on some of its most important policy and -- now that we have provided it, in concert with other ICANN stakeholders -- its staff have laughed it off. How strongly is At-Large going to fight this disgrace? What are the candidates for Director going to propose? Where would the ATRT stand on a process by which stakeholders can be stopped in their tracks by staff, which has threatened to drag out the process longer should we complain and make us the scapegoats of all the TLD applicants waiting for their chance? This is truly disgusting. - Evan

2 1

Fwd: [jcdwg] Announcement - Final version of draft DSSA charter posted
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Nov. 15, 2010

Nov. 15, 2010

This will need to be discussed further in preparation for action at Catargena at the ALAC Meeting later this month... Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Kristina Nordstrom <kristina.nordstrom(a)icann.org> Date: 16 November 2010 08:04 Subject: [jcdwg] Announcement - Final version of draft DSSA charter posted To: "jcdwg(a)icann.org" <jcdwg(a)icann.org> Cc: Bart(a)mm.icann.org, Gisella Gruber-White <Gisella.Gruber-White(a)icann.org>, Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> Dear all, Following announcement has now been posted on the ccNSO website ( http://ccnso.icann.org/announcements/announcement-15nov10-en.htm) “Date: 15 Nov 2010 *The informal joint ALAC, ccNSO, GNSO and NRO charter drafting working group has submitted the final version of the draft charter to ICANN's Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committee's for adoption according to their own rules and procedures. The final draft can be viewed here:* http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/dssa-draft-charter-12nov10-en.pdf” Kind regards, Kristina / ccNSO Secretariat _______________________________________________ jcdwg mailing list jcdwg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/jcdwg

1 0

Re: [ALAC] ATRT Cartagena schedule
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Nov. 15, 2010

Nov. 15, 2010

Thank you Brian The ALAC / At-Large Leaders schedule at this stage has allocated time for discussion on ATRT recommendations on Tue see excerpt below from our full schedule at https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Cartagena+2010+-+Meeti… any or all available members of the ATRT would be most welcome for discussions then ( all our meetings are open any way) and/or perhaps a joint AC/SO opportunity might be arranged, if so we would be most interested... Tuesday, 7 December 2010 *ALAC: Policy Discussion - Part II* *Time:* 10:30-12:30 *Meeting Room:* Pegasus Mardi, 7 décembre 2010 *ALAC: Discussion sur les politiques - 2ème Partie* *Horaire:* 10:30-12:30 *Salle de réunion*: Pegasus Martes, 7 de diciembre de 2010 *ALAC: discusión sobre las políticas - 2a parte* *Horario:* 10:30-12:30 *Sala de reunión:* Pegasus *Agenda:* - ATRT - Next Steps and Development of ALAC Statement (10:30-11:30) Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) On 16 November 2010 07:29, Brian Cute <briancute(a)afilias.info> wrote: > Dear Cheryl, > > > > This serves as a reminder that the Accountability and Transparency Review > Team (ATRT) posted draft proposed recommendations for public comment on > November 3, 2010 > http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/atrt-proposed-recommendations-2…. > The comment period closes on December 3, 2010. > > > > At the ICANN meeting in Cartagena, the ATRT will hold an open meeting with > the ICANN Board from 4:00p.m. to 5:30p.m. and will hold a public session on > Monday, December 6, 2010 from 2:00p.m. to 3:30p.m. The ATRT has been asked > by the GAC to meet with them in Cartagena. The ATRT has not scheduled any > additional meetings for the Cartagena ICANN meeting. If your organization > desires to meet with the ATRT in Cartagena, please indicate so that > scheduling can be addressed. > > > > Sincerely, > > Brian Cute > > Chairman, ATRT > > >

1 0

The Proposed Final New gTLD Applicant Guidebook is Available for Public Comment
by Alan Greenberg Nov. 13, 2010

Nov. 13, 2010

Just released! Great weekend reading. ;-) Alan >From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> >To: liaison6c <liaison6c(a)gnso.icann.org> >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 04:27:56 -0500 >Subject: [liaison6c] The Proposed Final New gTLD Applicant Guidebook is > Available for Public Comment > > >http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-12nov10-en.htm > >The Proposed Final New gTLD Applicant Guidebook >is Available for Public Comment >http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-5-en.htm > >12 November 2010 >Guidebook and Public Comment Forum > >ICANN is pleased to publish the Proposed Final >New gTLD Applicant Guidebook that describes the >process of applying for new generic top-level >domains. The Guidebook was released today along >with explanatory memoranda and detailed analysis >of comments received on version 4 of the >Applicant Guidebook. This Proposed Final version >of the Guidebook is the result of a tremendous >amount of participation and thoughtful feedback >from the ICANN stakeholder community. Their >contribution is evidenced through the product of >several working groups - bringing key issues to resolution. > >During the 10 December Board Meeting in >Cartagena the ICANN Board will take into account >this work and comments received to make a >decision regarding the timing of the launch of >the New gTLD Program. The Board can approve the >Guidebook or direct that changes be made. > >Upon approval of the final version of the >Guidebook, a four-month global communications >campaign will be undertaken. The aim of this >campaign is to ensure potential participants in >all regions of the world are aware of program details and how to apply. >The Proposed Final Applicant Guidebook - What changed from version 4? >Module 1 > > * Eliminated most restrictions on Registrar > cross-ownership - based on recent Board > decision - see > http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-09nov10-en.htm > * Added information on application > batching, delegation rates, dependencies for root scaling > * Refocused background screening criteria > only on business, criminal background, and cybersquatting > * Added placeholder for outcomes on > Applicant Support Working Group - see this > Working Group milestone report here: > http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-11nov10-en.htm > >Module 2 > > * Updated string requirements section per > anticipated RFC 1123 revisions, which addresses the use of numbers in TLDs > * Added UNESCO list as reference for continent/region names > >Module 3 > > * Incorporated Intergovernmental > Organizations (IGOs) into Legal Rights Objection > * Eliminated the complete defense to > Community Objections in favor of elevated standard for successful objection > * Included several recommendations from the > "Rec 6 Working Group" dealing with the morality and public order objection > >Module 4 - no significant changes >Module 5 > > * Added explanation of ICANN Board's role > in the new gTLD process in accordance with > Board Resolution 2.7 - Sept 26 2010 See: > http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-25sep10-en.htm#2.7 > >Other Documents to be finalized and posted soon include: > > * The Economic Analysis of program costs and benefits > >We continue to incorporate work done by cross >stakeholder working groups in the areas of: >morality and public order objections; and >recommendations suggested by the Applicant Support Working Group. >Upcoming Program Events > >During the December ICANN Meeting in Cartagena, >Colombia there will be several program sessions, including: > > * New gTLD Program Status Update > * New gTLD Basics - in Spanish and English > * Developing Economies and the New gTLD Program > * Sessions with updates on "overarching > issues" including: Economic Analysis; Trademark > Protections, Mitigation of Malicious Conduct; and Root Zone Scaling > >For final schedule and remote participation >access information see: http://cartagena39.icann.org/sched-overview > > >Glen de Saint Géry >GNSO Secretariat >gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org >http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Candidate Statement and CV
by Alan Greenberg Nov. 12, 2010

Nov. 12, 2010

Prior to the tomorrow's (or today for some) community call with the three candidates for the At-Large Director, I have posted my CV and a Candidate Statement. They can be found at https://community.icann.org/display/DirCan/Alan+Greenberg+-+At-Large+Board+…. For your convenience, the Candidate Statement follows this message. Alan ================================ I am honoured to have been selected as a candidate for the first seating of a voting Board Director selected by the At-Large Community. I would like to take this opportunity to briefly discuss my overall history, my involvement in ICANN, and what I would like to accomplish as your Director. History ======= I have spent the majority of my career in a variety of technology and technology-management positions. Although I no longer consider myself to be a technical expert, I have maintained my interest and overall level of knowledge in many computer and networking areas, and can still quickly get up to speed on specific areas where required. I have successfully managed large groups of people and budgets, and survived in an environment where you could only succeed by working cooperatively with others. Much of my career was in the not-for-profit sector, but I also ran successful businesses and spent too much of my time negotiating contracts. I have been on a number of not-for-profit Boards over the last 25 years. All together, I believe that I will function well in the ICANN Board environment. In the mid 1990s, I began volunteer work with the Internet Society running the Network Training Workshops that trained much of the local staff that allowed 140 developing countries to connect to the Internet. Since my retirement from full-time employment, I have taken on a number of assignments related to the effective use of Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) in developing countries, and how donor countries and international agencies can improve their ICT support. Focus areas have been education, health care and overall poverty alleviation. ICANN ===== Although I participated in the 2000 At-Large director selection as an individual voter, my substantive involvement in ICANN began when I was appointed to the ALAC by the Nominating Committee in 2006. From discussions held prior to and at my first ICANN meeting, it was obvious that despite a number of superb people sitting on the ALAC (the Interim ALAC at that time, since it was prior to the creation of any RALOs), the group as a whole had a very poor reputation in ICANN. I was determined to do what I could to change that. At this meeting, the Liaison from the ALAC to the GNSO was stepping down, and I volunteered to fill that role - a role that I have held since then. Through my participation in the GNSO Council and gTLD issues in general, I believe that I have helped us gain credibility within ICANN. To quote Avri Doria in a recent message (http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss/2010-November/004131.ht…) >"At-Large/ALAC has achieved a good start with its use of the by-laws >capability of introducing issue report requests in GNSO. And Alan's >job as not only a liaison to the GNSO council, but often as a >virtual council member, including as a chair of a GNSO WG, has gone >a long way to increasing ALAC visibility." During the last two years, I have served as the ALAC Rapporteur and then Vice-Chair. In those roles as well as that of a regular ALAC member, I have contributed heavily to both policy and administrative matters. As referred to above, I took responsibility for the issue of Domain Tasting. This was an issue that had been discussed within ICANN for a number of years, but with no concrete action taken. My actions led to the initiation of a GNSO Policy Development Process (PDP) which ultimately eliminated Domain Tasting. The Bylaws had always allowed the ALAC to initiate such action, but this was the first time it was exercised. I followed this with a PDP on ensuring that registrants could recover gTLD domain names if they inadvertently let them expire, a PDP which is still ongoing. As indicated by these and other actions, I believe strongly in collaborative efforts. I have participated in a number of them within ICANN, including the groups that, against all odds, found a way to satisfactorily reorganize the GNSO and the group that addressed the gTLD Intellectual Property issues following the extreme dissatisfaction with the IRT Report. ALAC and At-Large are in a MUCH better position now than four years ago. The fact that we have this voting seat on the Board is clear evidence. This change was the result of a lot of people working really hard, but I take some comfort in knowing that I played a significant part in it. ICANN Board =========== If I am selected to be the first At-Large Director, I will have a number of specific targets. Several of these were discussed in my Statement of Interest (http://tinyurl.com/AlanGreenberg-SoI) 1. I will do my best to make sure that ICANN staff and Board not be as focused on developed countries only. Not everyone in the world has wideband 24 hr Internet access, and if ICANN wants to be considered a world organization, it must be receptive to norms other that those typical in western developed countries. 2. Transparency is not just about telling people how transparent you are, it is about them believing it. The Accountability and Transparency Review Team is addressing some of those issues, but there are more that were not within their scope. The fact that we are making some progress is encouraging. 3. The Affirmation of Commitments talks about "public interest" and "the interests of global Internet users". These issues need to be considered in every ICANN decision. Part of that is certainly soliciting and then listening to the opinions of the formal At-Large Community. But it is also making sure that the really load voices of the ICANN contracted parties and other business interests do not drown out the less powerful and less well-funded voices. I do, however, have one overriding goal. That is to do all within my power to make the Board and the ICANN Community see the unique value in having a voting Director selected by At-Large. If that can be achieved, then At-Large will have passed another test on our way to being a full partner in ICANN's multi-stakeholder environment.

1 0