Step one is being aware of the issues. Step two is trying to determine what we, as ICANN At-Large, are able to do about them. Do existing contracts with gTLDs give ICANN the ability to demand action on these issues from their registries? Does ICANN even have the right to demand to know what policies exist? I'm new to the process and still trying to determine what leverage ICANN has on these issues beyond addressing them in future registry agreements. I'm not even sure if ICANN is capable of imposing such policy positions in renewals of existing contracts, or will it get sued. At the SJ meeting I was made very aware of debate regarding actual limits of ICANN's power and influence, especially over existing registries. While these issues are indeed very important, it is also critical to know what role ICANN can play in fixing the problem, so that we can best understand how within At-Large to move forward. At very least there is an education role to play in making sure the public (via existing ALSs to start) is made aware of the issue. But it's important that, if At-Large take any actual policy-study initiatives, there is at least a forum in which the results of thus study can have an effect. Spending a lot of volunteer resources on policy, only to find that ICANN couldn't do anything even were the Board to agree with our position, strikes me as a very ineffective use of community energy. It' s one thing to take a position, even an unpopular one, with the intent of influencing policy and direction. It's quite different to take a strong stand on something that ICANN is unable to act upon. - Evan