Dear ALAC members, At the Executive Committee (ExCom) conference call yesterday, Evan Leibovitch proposed the creation of a sub-group operating under the New gTLD Working Group already in place: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+New+gTLDs This new sub-group would be called AGAT-WT - The Applicant Guidebook Alternate Text Working Team. Evan's description of the group is as follows: The Applicant Guidebook Alternate Text (AGAT) Working Team is intended to be comprised of a small number of end-user-focused members of the ICANN community. This Team will create specific wording change proposals to the new gTLD Applicant Guidebook (AG) designed to address specific (and substantial) issues raised by the At-Large Community, the Government Advisory Committee (GAC) and others. Its intent is to * Respond to Board and GAC concerns within specific areas of the AG -- notably on applicant support in lesser developed economies and objections based on strings perceived to be offensive. * Define an *implementation* of existing policy that differs from the current ICANN (staff) interpretations. * Deliver wording (and commentary as applicable) that is straightforward and does not require "refining" by staff (except for legal purposes). * Maintain the consensus decisions made by the Recommendation 6 Cross-Community Working Group (CWG) while offering specific wording changes to issues on which the group was deadlocked. * Be open and transparent (though some initial preparatory work may be closed). The group will NOT: * Re-open non-controversial components of the AG that are already considered resolved (*). * Contravene existing GNSO policy (this is about process and wording detail, not high-level policy. * Implement any wording going against any consensus achieved by the CWG. The timing is such that this group is asked to have at least a rough form of its proposed wording changes available in advance of the GAC/Board meeting likely to take place in Geneva, at the end of February 2011. Endorsement by as many ICANN communities as possible is desirable, but lack thereof must not impair its transmission to the Board in time for consideration. It is our hope that this contribution may serve as a catalyst for an accommodation between the ICANN communities on such contentions issues. --------------------- (*) -- while not on the Board or GAC commentaries, the user-focused community has strong views on a single regressive change regarding the trademark-related take-down notices. This Working Team may propose suggestions here too even though they may be beyond the bounds of the Board or GAC communications. The ALAC Executive Committee is looking forward to receive comments and suggestions from the ALAC on this proposed sub-group. Due to short deadlines, we cannot wait to discuss this at the monthly ALAC call at the end of this month. Would you be in favour of the creation of this sub-group? Any objections? Would you be interested in joining it? I look forward to receiving your feedback. Best wishes, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond ALAC Chair