I would like to think that the ALAC motion taken in LA has been the catalyst for this flurry of activity on an issue so many in ICANN thought (hoped?) was dead. The letters we have seen lately on the Public Interest Commitments issue simply re-enforce what we saw in the Public Comment Process on it -- it's the domain industry versus the rest of the world. We now have what is actually a moment of unusual clarity at ICANN. The lines have rarely been drawn this sharply, on a matter that at its core directly concerns public trust in the domain name system. At a time when it is under more global scrutiny than ever, the ICANN Board is now forced to reveal its true loyalties between the public interest (in this case, a coalition of governments, registrants and end users) and the industry it is supposed to be regulating. In its decision, ICANN will tell the world -- which is already watching its every move with scepticism -- to whom it is ultimately accountable, and whether the term "multistakeholder" actually means something. I await the Board's response. I hope to be surprised but do not expect to be. - Evan On 10 December 2014 at 21:51, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/ gtld-rysg-to-crocker-icann-board-05dec14-en.pdf
Alan