Yes, our ALSs reach "many end users" in the sense of large absolute numbers. But as a percentage of the total end user population? No. "Microscopic" might better describe that number.
And that is really the point here. Reaching a signifigant portion of the end users is simply not possible. Convincing them to become knowledgeable about arcane details (and, to those outside ICANN, they are extremely arcane) regarding TLDs, even if we could reach them, is simply not going to happen. Therefore, acting based on the differences between gTLDs and ccTLDs is, in Olivier's words, blaming the victim.
I would even go so far as to say that, by insisting on treating the two groups differently, ICANN is setting itself up for potentially quite expensive legal action down the road. How we get around the legal restrictions on us is, of course, outside the realm of this discussion. But I think our response would do well to at least mention that treating gTLDs and ccTLDs differently here could have unintended consequences.
Bill Jouris
On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 10:15 AM, Alberto Soto via CPWG
<cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list --
cpwg@icann.orgTo unsubscribe send an email to
cpwg-leave@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.