- At-Large - lists.icann.org

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten May 22, 2009

May 22, 2009

Total of 6 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri May 22 00:53:02 EDT 2009 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 33.33% | 2 | 50.97% | 25995 | roberto at icann.org 33.33% | 2 | 26.25% | 13387 | karl at cavebear.com 16.67% | 1 | 12.62% | 6436 | narten at us.ibm.com 16.67% | 1 | 10.16% | 5182 | johnl at iecc.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 6 |100.00% | 51000 | Total

1 0

FW: Respectful Online Communication and Behavior
by Roberto Gaetano May 19, 2009

May 19, 2009

Karl, > In conclusion, I am once again stunned that ICANN permitted money to > be spent in the creation of this document. I don't think that the ICANN Board should go into details like what document the Ombudsman should or should not develop and publish. I am convinced that the actual system, that gives the Ombudsman latitude in the way he/she will use her/his budget is appropriate. Best regards, Roberto > -----Original Message----- > From: at-large-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Karl > Auerbach > Sent: Wednesday, 13 May 2009 20:47 > To: At-Large Worldwide > Cc: avri(a)acm.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org; ccnso-council(a)icann.org; > louie(a)equinix.com; Disspain; janis.karklins(a)icann.org; jun(a)wide.ad.jp; > Steve Crocker; Charles A. (Chuck) Gomes; liaison6c(a)gnso.icann.org; > policy(a)icann.org > Subject: Re: [At-Large] Respectful Online Communication and Behavior > > Frank Fowlie wrote: > > > I don't believe that there is anything strange or naïve in the > > expectation that participants in an organization which represents a > > global community would conduct themselves at a level of > discourse and > > behaviour that includes respectful communication. > > You seem to have entirely missed the point of my note. > > Yesterday I visited the home of Thomas Jefferson, the man who drafted > the United States' Declaration of Independence. The Declaration was > drafted in the most respectful of terms but it stated with clarity and > force an utter repudiation of the king's position. > > The core of your document is not respect but self emasculation: > > Your document tells us to "exercis[e] independent judgment based > solely on what is in the overall best interest of Internet users and > the stability and security of the Internet's system of unique > identifiers, irrespective of personal interests and the interests of > the entity to which an individual might owe their appointment." > > ICANN's board members do in fact have a fiduciary duty that somewhat > resembles the above. But we are not board members. > > And ICANN employees are required in the course of their jobs to follow > the policies set forth by ICANN's board. But we are not ICANN > employees. > > Those of us who argue for positions within ICANN are entitled to argue > for our own values. We may use such means of expression as we feel > most appropriate. > > Further, many of us are attorneys who represent clients in these > matters. It would be a violation of our professional obligations to > our clients were we to set aside their interests and substitute your > "overall best interest of the Internet user" standard. Others, who > work form corporate "stakeholders" within ICANN would often be in > dereliction of their own duties to their employers were they to set > aside the interests of their employer. > > Your note is out of touch with the ICANN that exists. ICANN is a > system of economic regulation of the domain name space. > ICANN does virtually nothing that pertains to the "stability and > security of the Internet's system of unique identifiers". > > In conclusion, I am once again stunned that ICANN permitted money to > be spent in the creation of this document. > > --karl-- > > _______________________________________________ > At-Large mailing list > At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlar ge-lists.icann.org > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

3 4

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten May 15, 2009

May 15, 2009

Total of 25 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri May 15 00:53:03 EDT 2009 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 12.00% | 3 | 10.84% | 19868 | karl at cavebear.com 12.00% | 3 | 10.59% | 19410 | carlosaguirre62 at hotmail.com 8.00% | 2 | 8.92% | 16349 | sophiabekele at gmail.com 8.00% | 2 | 8.26% | 15137 | jam at jacquelinemorris.com 8.00% | 2 | 5.99% | 10989 | johnl at iecc.com 4.00% | 1 | 5.94% | 10884 | vanda at uol.com.br 4.00% | 1 | 5.78% | 10600 | dominik.filipp at dsoft.sk 4.00% | 1 | 5.70% | 10447 | brenbe at consumer.org 4.00% | 1 | 4.94% | 9058 | dave.piscitello at icann.org 4.00% | 1 | 4.72% | 8660 | denise.michel at icann.org 4.00% | 1 | 4.67% | 8566 | frank.fowlie at icann.org 4.00% | 1 | 4.07% | 7457 | jsalgueiro at cantv.net 4.00% | 1 | 4.05% | 7418 | ymshana2003 at hotmail.com 4.00% | 1 | 3.78% | 6931 | baptista at publicroot.org 4.00% | 1 | 3.15% | 5768 | narten at us.ibm.com 4.00% | 1 | 3.08% | 5647 | bfausett at internet.law.pro 4.00% | 1 | 2.85% | 5219 | icann-list at sorehands.com 4.00% | 1 | 2.68% | 4908 | mom at netmom.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 25 |100.00% | 183316 | Total

1 0

Respectful Online Communication and Behavior
by Denise Michel May 13, 2009

May 13, 2009

Dear ICANN Community Leaders and Members: ICANN's Ombudsman, Frank Fowlie, recently posted a web page on Respectful Online Communication and Behavior: <http://icann.org/ombudsman/respectful-communication-en.htm>. This page emphasizes the importance of respectful communication in ICANN, particularly in this phase of its development as an international organization: "Members of the community are asked to bear in mind that fellow community members, volunteers, stakeholders, and staff members are all deserving of considerate treatment. Members of the community are asked to bear in mind that the diversity of thought, and diversity of participants, in this unique - bottom up - consensus driven - multilingual and multicultural organization is ICANN’s strength." ICANN's Standard of Behaviour also can be found on this page, and is included below for easy reference. I know some community leaders are discussing how to further encourage and enforce these standards within their community. Please don't hesitate to contact ICANN Staff if there is anything we can do to assist with this endeavor. Regards, Denise Denise Michel ICANN Vice President Policy Development policy-staff(a)icann.org *ICANN EXPECTED STANDARDS OF BEHAVIOR* "Those who take part in ICANN multi-stakeholder process including Board, staff and all those involved in Supporting Organization and Advisory Committee councils undertake to: Act in accordance with ICANN's Bylaws. In particular, participants undertake to act within the mission of ICANN and in the spirit of the values contained in the Bylaws. Adhere to the conflict of interest policy laid out in the Bylaws. Treat all members of the ICANN community equally, irrespective of nationality, gender, racial or ethnic origin, religion or beliefs, disability, age, or sexual orientation; members of the ICANN community should treat each other with civility both face to face and online. Act in a reasonable and informed manner when participating in policy development and decision-making processes. This includes regularly attending all scheduled meetings and exercising independent judgment based solely on what is in the overall best interest of Internet users and the stability and security of the Internet's system of unique identifiers, irrespective of personal interests and the interests of the entity to which an individual might owe their appointment. Listen to the views of all stakeholders when considering policy issues. ICANN is a unique multi-stakeholder environment. Those who take part in the ICANN process must acknowledge the importance of all stakeholders and seek to understand their points of view. Work to build consensus with other stakeholders in order to find solutions to the issues that fall within the areas of ICANN's responsibility. The ICANN model is based on a bottom-up, consensus driven approach to policy development. Those who take part in the ICANN process must take responsibility for ensuring the success of the model by trying to build consensus with other participants. Act in accordance with ICANN policies. Protect the organization's assets and ensure their efficient and effective use. Act fairly and in good faith with other participants in the ICANN process."

13 15

Re: [At-Large] Respectful Online Communication and Behavior
by Bill Silverstein May 13, 2009

May 13, 2009

> To Karl and Carlos, > > I don't believe that there is anything strange or naïve in the expectation > that participants in an organization which represents a global community > would conduct themselves at a level of discourse and behaviour that > includes respectful communication. This is an international forum for > debate and discussion, and while no one has the reasonable expectation of > Platonic debate, neither do participants want to be involved in name > calling and behaviours which more closely resemble a school yard at recess > than an international cooperative effort. > > There is no proposal that any party not vigorously pursue the advocacy of > their own position, only that they do so in a manner that is respectful of > others. > > > > Dr. Frank Fowlie, DCR > Ombudsman While you are correct, in theory, it never works like that. This type of behavior 'guideline' turns into a tool for censorship and political correctness.

5 4

It's time to end the failed Ombudsman experiment, was Respectful Online Communication and Behavior
by John R. Levine May 12, 2009

May 12, 2009

>> ICANN's Ombudsman, Frank Fowlie, recently posted a web page on Respectful >> Online Communication and Behavior > > I must say that I found that to be a rather strange document. Unfortunately, I don't find it odd at all. ICANN's Ombudsman, who has never had more than a trickle of complaints to justify his position, now will be Hall Monitor, or perhaps Head Censor, which will allow him to invent cases at will. It's been clear for years that the Ombudsman experiment is a failure, adding neither clarity nor fairness to ICANN's process. It's long past time to delete Article V from the ICANN bylaws and bring the experiment to an end. If ICANN wants to be credible and transparent, it needs fewer, simpler processes. R's, John

2 1

new gTLDs held until 1st Q 2010
by Brendler, Beau May 12, 2009

May 12, 2009

pardon me if you have heard about this already --------------------------------------------------------- http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-07may09-en.htm New gTLD Program Update 7 May 2009 ICANN continues to move forward in the implementation of the new gTLD Program while balancing and addressing community concerns on specific aspects of the program. The public comment period on the second version of the applicant guidebook recently closed and work continues to proceed regarding the discussion of overarching issues. In order to continue progress and the community discussion, ICANN will: * Publish an analysis of comments similar to that published after the fist version of the Guidebook, * Conduct consultations and fora at the Sydney meeting and afterward to develop solutions to the overarching issues, * Publish the third version of the Guidebook after the Sydney meeting when solutions to the overarching issues can be included. With that in mind, it is anticipated that applications for new top-level domains will be accepted starting in the first quarter of 2010. Guidebook Analysis As with the first version of the Guidebook, ICANN will organize and report a synopsis of all the comment made in the ICANN comment forum as well as at the ICANN meeting in Mexico City. The report will analyse comment by category and balance different proposals made. The goals of the report are to: * analyse the comment in order to develop amendments to the Guidebook that are consonant with the meaningful input of the community, and * demonstrate that the comment is taken seriously and carefully considered. ICANN will not be producing a third version of the Applicant Guidebook for new generic top-level domains before its upcoming June meeting in Sydney, Australia. This is because the discussion of overarching issues will continue through the meeting and beyond (as was expected). Publication of a new Guidebook version without addressing these issues might signal that they are not considered important. In order to provide specifics and point up discussion, the Comment Analysis will be accompanied by several excerpted redlined sections of the Guidebook so that potential changes can be discussed. These excerpted sections are being developed in response to the recently closed public comment forum and will be published in time for discussion in the Sydney meeting. Overarching Issues ICANN previously identified four overarching issues with respect to the new gTLD program. Significant progress has been made on each and the Sydney meeting will be used to focus on that work in the hope of finding solutions. For example, a session dedicated to trademark issues will take place on Wednesday, 24 June at the Sydney meeting. There will also be an update session on the opening day of the meeting, as well as the usual updates and public forums. Starting with the first session in Sydney, regional events will be held in Europe, the Americas and Asia, to develop Guidebook solutions to Trademark issues. Those sessions will discuss solutions offered by the Implementation Recommendation Team (http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-24apr09-en.htm) and other sources. Timing The comment analysis and redlined Guidebook sections will be published in time for discussion at the Sydney meeting. The third version of the Guidebook is scheduled to be published in early September; the comment period for that version will close after the ICANN meeting in Seoul (25-30 October 2009). This timing enables the publication of the final Guidebook and following a communications period, the acceptance of applications in the first quarter of 2010. New gTLDs and the Internet Openness Change Innovation After years of discussion and thought, generic Top-Level Domains (gTLDs) are being expanded. They will allow for more innovation, choice and change to a global Internet presently served by just 21 generic top-level domain names. A draft Applicant Guidebook describing the detailed application process has been developed with opportunities for public comment. Additional information on the Program can be found at: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtld-program.htm. ICANN is a not for profit corporation dedicated to coordinating the Internet's addressing system. Promoting competition and choice is one of the principles upon which ICANN was founded. In a world with 1.5 billion Internet users (and growing), diversity, choice and innovation are key. The Internet has supported huge increases in choice, innovation and the competition of ideas and expanding new gTLDs is an opportunity for more. For those interested in knowing more about the process, program and future meetings please visit the New gTLD Program webpage at: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtld-program.htm. An online wiki outlines progress on the overarching issues and can be found at: https://st.icann.org/new-gtld-overarching-issues/index.cgi Related links: New gTLD Program webpage: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtld-program.htm Overarching issues wiki: https://st.icann.org/new-gtld-overarching-issues/index.cgi Sydney meeting website: http://syd.icann.org/ ** This e-mail message is intended only for the designated recipient(s) named above. The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not review, retain, copy, redistribute or use this e-mail or any attachment for any purpose, or disclose all or any part of its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments from your computer system.

1 0

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten May 8, 2009

May 8, 2009

Total of 11 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri May 8 00:53:02 EDT 2009 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 18.18% | 2 | 22.89% | 17545 | franck.martin at gmail.com 18.18% | 2 | 22.11% | 16949 | isolatedn at gmail.com 18.18% | 2 | 15.46% | 11855 | ajp at glocom.ac.jp 9.09% | 1 | 8.90% | 6824 | ocl at gih.com 9.09% | 1 | 8.27% | 6337 | sophiabekele at gmail.com 9.09% | 1 | 8.15% | 6251 | narten at us.ibm.com 9.09% | 1 | 7.60% | 5825 | dogwallah at gmail.com 9.09% | 1 | 6.62% | 5077 | patrick at vande-walle.eu --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 11 |100.00% | 76663 | Total

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Fwd: [governance] EC recommends a "G12" for IG
by Sivasubramanian Muthusamy May 5, 2009

May 5, 2009

Hello To progress from G1 to G12 appears to be a good idea. Viviane Reding proposes G12 as "an informal group of government representatives that meets at least twice a year and can make, by majority, recommendations to ICANN where appropriate. To be geographically balanced, this "G-12 for Internet Governance" should include two representatives from each North America, South America, Europe and Africa, three representatives from Asia and Australia, as well as the Chairman of ICANN as a non-voting member. International Organisations with competences in this field could be given observer status. The idea is that "it is not defendable that the government department of only one country has oversight of an internet function which is used by hundreds of millions of people in countries all over the world". At the same time, the accountability of ICANN due to its "unique position of a global quasi-monopoly... requires global management... [as] monopolies always involve the risk of abuse. And who should ICANN be accountable to? Not the UN, because "decisions on internet governance need to be taken swiftly". So a G 12. The G12 for Internet Governance differs from a NATO or OPEC, as it is "informal" and "geographically balanced" with the inclusion of the ICANN chairman as a "non-voting" member with "observer" status granted to International Organizations. Good progress. But a move by Governments to take over the Internet? Why voting status to the Government 12 and observer status to the International Organizations? I would, in my independent opinion prefer an I 12 for Internet Governance with the twelve governments as Observers.... Sivasubramanian Muthusamy (individual views) On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 11:15 PM, Adam Peake <ajp(a)glocom.ac.jp> wrote: > 9 minutes, well worth listening to what Viviane Reding has to say. > > Adam > > > To: governance(a)lists.cpsr.org >> From: Meryem Marzouki <marzouki(a)ras.eu.org> >> Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 19:26:55 +0200 >> >> Viviane Reding recommendation on IG: >> - A fully privatized and independent ICANN >> - Judicial review (complaints) "by a small, independent international >> tribunal" (instead of California court) >> - (Governmental) Oversight by a "G12" (geographically balanced) >> http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/reding/video/index_en.htm >> >> So, progress on multilateral oversight. Business (and when I say business, >> I really mean the business sector) as usual on other issues. IG seems to be >> seen as a consumer issue only. >> >> Enjoy! >> Meryem >> >> -- >> Meryem Marzouki - http://www.iris.sgdg.org >> IRIS - Imaginons un réseau Internet solidaire >> 40 rue de la Justice - 75020 Paris >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance(a)lists.cpsr.org >> To be removed from the list, send any message to: >> governance-unsubscribe(a)lists.cpsr.org >> >> For all list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance >> > > > _______________________________________________ > At-Large mailing list > At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.ican… > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >

7 8

Fwd: [governance] EC recommends a "G12" for IG
by Adam Peake May 4, 2009

May 4, 2009

9 minutes, well worth listening to what Viviane Reding has to say. Adam >To: governance(a)lists.cpsr.org >From: Meryem Marzouki <marzouki(a)ras.eu.org> >Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 19:26:55 +0200 > >Viviane Reding recommendation on IG: >- A fully privatized and independent ICANN >- Judicial review (complaints) "by a small, >independent international tribunal" (instead of >California court) >- (Governmental) Oversight by a "G12" (geographically balanced) >http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/reding/video/index_en.htm > >So, progress on multilateral oversight. Business >(and when I say business, I really mean the >business sector) as usual on other issues. IG >seems to be seen as a consumer issue only. > >Enjoy! >Meryem > >-- >Meryem Marzouki - http://www.iris.sgdg.org >IRIS - Imaginons un réseau Internet solidaire >40 rue de la Justice - 75020 Paris > > >____________________________________________________________ >You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance(a)lists.cpsr.org >To be removed from the list, send any message to: > governance-unsubscribe(a)lists.cpsr.org > >For all list information and functions, see: > http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

1 0