I think that ALAC/At-Large can do more, but I don't think we are always "enablers." We do put out advice calling ICANN to task, and we do speak up at meetings and in Working Groups when something is rotten.

This is one of the times that we should speak up (and not only amongst ourselves).

However, for those not in the US, it may be hard to imagine how extraordinary the current moment feels. The Executive Branch is constantly taking actions that are cruel, arbitrary, unlawful, undemocratic, hyperaggressive, and incredibly damaging. It is a campaign of retribution, summary punishment, and scapegoating, accompanied by gaslighting, insults, hypocrisy and demagoguery. The intent is to strike fear and trepidation into the hearts of all those who want to take or maintain positions that are at odds with the current administration's worldview and priorities. It's essentially radical right-wing extremist terrorism, and it has people and organizations running scared.

Some organizations have stood their ground, while others have wilted under pressure or even taken pre-emptive steps to comply, or at least avoid being a prime target. The administration really is using simple, crude word searches and image searches and half-baked indicators to go after organizations, in ways that are often shocking. ICANN is hardly the only organization scrubbing websites, renaming departments, etc. Some of these organizations truly seem to be changing their goals and standards, while others are trying "have their cake and eat it, too" by making obvious changes while stating that their core values and priorities haven't changed. In some cases, this latter approach has boomeranged because it was too obviously "window dressing." In other cases, it seems to have enabled organizations to dodge the bullet.

I don't support what ICANN has done, but I can understand it. We don't know what might have been happening behind the scenes that triggered this. It's also possible that Jones Day, as a "Trump-friendly" firm, was giving pre-emptive and self-serving advice.

However, ICANN does need to keep in mind that it is a global organization, and that diversity (in many different flavors) is essential to its mission and to maintaining its standing with many stakeholders (especially but not only those outside of the US). These are ill-considered moves and we should be calling them out on it.

Greg

On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 10:11 AM Antony Van Couvering via At-Large <at-large@icann.org> wrote:

ALAC doesn’t know its power because it has never tested its power. To date, it has politely stayed in its lane. Why is this?

Surely the conscience of the organization, as I’ve seen ALAC described on this list, should be showing the board and the staff their failings in stark terms, and challenging them to do better, nagging them constantly, as consciences do. Consciences are not polite.

I am reminded of the joke about the politician who struggled with his conscience: he won.

But at least he had to struggle.

On May 20, 2025, at 6:27 AM, Glenn McKnight <mcknight.glenn@gmail.com> wrote:

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.

_______________________________________________
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.