Dear Stephen,

I concur with you on the idea that a strong message is needed to avoid a similar situation from happening in ICANN72 or beyond.

That message is conveyed in the proposed letter that Alejandra intends to send ALAC this coming Monday.

Any thoughts?

Regards,

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 9:52 PM Stephen Deerhake @ ASNIC via Ccnso-council <ccnso-council@icann.org> wrote:

Greetings,

This morning I thought the letter that Alejandra had proposed for ALAC regarding their “Session 2” was reasonable (I suggested one minor modification).

However, I re-visited the recording of that session (https://icann.zoom.us/rec/play/6q8S8RS9A28Wrnh1NFZpLcRouRj5x1QIXKaNPQxXM3zGR7p0gZsc52Qeoy_gCPAGfY25zQbxbh8V-GsZ.7_-RR48rgbuJ7bCl?startTime=1623746002000&_x_zm_rtaid=kqBAIkbBTa2G2FLzrlHYrg.1625868260785.f2ee2aa4989dc231fd6692c863883e89&_x_zm_rhtaid=979) this afternoon and realized that at the end of the session, ALAC promised to have another similar session at ICANN72 (start around 01:20h in the recording for that).

We are thus in a situation were ALAC is planning another edition of what transpired at ICANN71, and I think the correspondence needs to be modified to reflect a more vigorous pushback against any future ALAC session regarding ccTLDs. The specific language I am seeking does not come to mind at the moment, but I am thinking about it…

I submit that it is really important to the ccNSO and the general ccTLD Community that we vigorously push back against what ALAC appears to be doing here, especially considering the dismal level of quality represented by Ms. Holly Raiche’s presentation during the ALAC session, to say nothing of her follow up during the subsequent Q&A near the end of the session.

Best Regards,

/Stephen

_______________________________________________
Ccnso-council mailing list
Ccnso-council@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccnso-council
_______________________________________________
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.