I think we have a range of opinions on ICANN as to its efforts of promoting DEI and a stalwart for multistakeholderism.  The critics are quick to point out ICANN's whitewashing and tokenism vs the potential to become truly a bottom up organization.   Beyond the ethnic and geographical representation, we have huge swaths of underrepresented groups ie.  Under 18 year olds, seniors, people of poverty and Persons with Disabilities, First Nations etc etc . 
We have to ask ourselves honestly   Is  Atlarge enabling ICANN to achieve its mission?  or we are just patsies for a closed and self serving group.  Perhaps a bit of both . 
G
Glenn McKnight, MA 
Virtual School of Internet Governance 
Chief Information Officer
www.virtualsig.org 
YOUR SOURCE FOR INTERNET GOVERNANCE EDUCATION 
Mobile  437-237-4655



On Tue, 20 May 2025 at 09:15, Christian de Larrinaga via At-Large <at-large@icann.org> wrote:

puff puff from all directions. This really is a land of the magic
dragons C


Antony Van Couvering <avc@avc.vc> writes:

> One meaningless non-statement by ICANN has inspired people on this list to make long posts about principles.
>
> Meanwhile others (or maybe the same ones) are working diligently on
> NomCom to find yet more go-along, get-along board members to
> rubber-stamp ICANN staff decisions.
>
> You’ll know you’re getting somewhere when ICANN starts threatening
> your funding. So long as you have pleasant staff members
> “co-ordinating” and “assisting” activities and meetings with a smile,
> you know ICANN is happy with what you do. In the meantime, you can
> expect more betrayals, because strong statements about principles on
> the At-Large listserv are like trying to blow over windmills with
> gusts of air.
>
> How about a demand from ALAC that the CEO or (gasp!) the General Counsel must go?
>
> At least they’d read it.
>
>> On May 20, 2025, at 02:24, Christian de Larrinaga via At-Large <at-large@icann.org> wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>> Karl Auerbach via At-Large <at-large@icann.org> writes:
>>
>>>> On 5/19/25 5:21 AM, Lutz Donnerhacke via At-Large wrote:
>>>> https://domainincite.com/31049-icann-kills-off-diversity-and-inclusion
>>>> It's a pity.
>>>
>>> More than a pity.  ICANN's footprint is worldwide.  Yet here is ICANN
>>> dancing to a foul tune of hate, bias, and discrimination being played
>>> by exactly one of the more than 150 national governments.
>>>
>>> That might make those other countries wonder "what tune can our
>>> country play to make ICANN dance to our policy whims?"
>>>
>>> And it might add to the skepticism of people in those other countries
>>> who wonder whether ICANN is really an aspect of US hegemony.
>>>
>>> The process of fracturing the Internet into regional, cultural,
>>> religious, or corporate internets is slow - but this move by ICANN is,
>>> in my eyes, a big wedge and sledge that significantly weakens the
>>> bonds that hold ICANN and the Internet together.
>>>
>>> One might ask "Who in ICANN decided on this change?"  And "why?".
>>>
>>>     --karl--
>>
>>
>> ICANN is a US corporation (Californian isn't it still)? So it can't be
>> surprising that the local political sphere creates waves within it.
>>
>> There was a sort of conceit that its legal jurisdiction as a US (nfp!)
>> corporation is a good thing as it provides a sound legal framework that
>> ensures that the global communities trying to achieve consensus over
>> managing UIRs can do so separately to the exigencies and needs of US
>> jurisdiction of ICANN under US jurisdiction.
>>
>> Too many now working through ICANN let alone at ICANN treat ICANN as the
>> voice of the community rather than a disposable shell whose only remit
>> and purpose is to serve the myriad communities around the world who
>> deploy UIRs to manage and serve Internet user experiences.
>>
>> Rather important I think that the reaction to this is that those global
>> communities stop being mesmerised by ICANN as a corporate body and
>> instead focus on what they really need to achieve to ensure the Internet
>> is for everyone. If ICANN fits a purpose to serve that then
>> wonderful. If things have moved on then those functions can be handled
>> in other ways and in alternative structures.
>>
>> I don't see this wording change as so significant as to require a
>> rewrite of ICANN today but also I don't see Internet fragmentation as a
>> function of diversity of management organisations of UIRs rather the
>> contrary as a reaction to over centralisation.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Christian de Larrinaga
>> _______________________________________________
>> At-Large mailing list -- at-large@icann.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to at-large-leave@icann.org
>>
>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of
>> your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list
>> accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy
>> (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of
>> Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the
>> Mailman link above to change your membership status or
>> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style
>> delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation),
>> and so on.

--
Christian de Larrinaga
_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list -- at-large@icann.org
To unsubscribe send an email to at-large-leave@icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.