David, I'm not going to comment on the substance of the PIR discussion here, although I largely agree with Greg.

But I will comment on the processes at Large uses to address consensus.

To a great extent, on most issues, there has been little dissent within At-Large on policy issues (there is at times disagreement on how At-Large or more likely parts of it govern themselves, but that is a different issue for a different time). Despite the widely ranging variation on circumstances, the underlying issues that impact end users (other than access and connectivity which are different but outside of ICANN's remit) are very similar.

But on occasion, there are various differing opinions on a particular issue. Sometimes discussion addresses this and we end up with the vast majority of a single mind (the ALS-Mobilization-WP discussions on whether there was a conflict with people or ALSes holding multiple positions within ICANN was one such example).

Very occasionally, we are divided and stay that way. There are two outcomes with regard to formal statements made by the ALAC on behalf of At-Large.

a) We decide that we must make a statement, but provide both sides/positions with some idea of split proportions.

b) We decide not to comment because we are not really in a position to speak on behalf of our divided community and that presenting the division would not really be helpful.

Although the ALAC itself at times votes and technically we decide most issues by a majority, I cannot recall a time where that vote was close (on policy issues) and we presented only the "winning" position. Consensus rules the day in most cases, and our rule of thumb is 80% must agree for a consensus to be declared.

Perhaps we need to get better at this, or be more precise, but these rules and processes have generally been acceptable for quite some number of years.

Alan

At 2020-05-03 03:35 PM, David Mackey wrote:

It's hard to see the words "There is mounting concern that ICANN is no longer responsive to the needs of its stakeholders." as being positive for ICANN without thoughtful reflection.

It also seems that the position of the California Attorney General aligns better with the dissent voiced in the At-Large CPWG email thread discussions, rather than the advice that was eventually given to the board.

The final .ORG decision may over, but I hope there's opportunity for a discussion on how to improve the At-Large consensus process.

It appears the dissent voices raised in this email group did, in fact, have merit and were not easily dismissed outside the At-Large community as being merely "passionate".

It might be a good idea to see how we as a community can better encapsulate dissent and non-consensus into our process.

On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 8:45 AM Matthias M. Hudobnik <matthias@hudobnik.at> wrote:

Well said Jonathan!

Have a nice day!

Best,

M.

_________________________

Ing. Mag. Matthias M. Hudobnik

matthias@hudobnik.at

http://www.hudobnik.at

Von: CPWG [ mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org] Im Auftrag von Jonathan Zuck

Gesendet: Samstag, 18. April 2020 09:49

An: Maureen Hilyard; Dev Anand Teelucksingh

Cc: CPWG

Betreff: Re: [CPWG] Calif. AG mentions ALAC advice in note to ICANN re: PIR

Interesting indeed. I would stress, however, that it might have much to do with our brand (as the sympathetic voice of end users) as it did with our content. Persistence of Perspective!

From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org > on behalf of Maureen Hilyard < maureen.hilyard@gmail.com>

Date: Friday, April 17, 2020 at 10:53 PM

To: Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com>

Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org>

Subject: Re: [CPWG] Calif. AG mentions ALAC advice in note to ICANN re: PIR

Interesting that it was our almost two pages of practical advice from the ALAC that gained the attention of the AG to use as a lash on ICANN than the letters to the Board from the ASO and NCSG.

M

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 4:43 PM Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com> wrote:

Indeed, interesting and noteworthy to point out that ALAC statements do have impact.

Its a pity because the PDF of the ALAC statement is on the wiki, the link is

https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/At-Large+Workspace%3A+ISOC+Sells+PIR?preview=/120821713/126423106/ALAC%20Advice%20to%20the%20ICANN%20Board%20on%20the%20ISOC%3APIR%20Issue%20-%20FINAL%20310120.pdf

Dev Anand

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 9:44 PM Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote:

Wow, quite a slap down by the AG of California. ALAC advice re: this

issue referenced as reasons for concern.

Marita

_______________________________________________

CPWG mailing list

CPWG@icann.org

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________

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.

_______________________________________________

CPWG mailing list

CPWG@icann.org

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________

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.

_______________________________________________

CPWG mailing list

CPWG@icann.org

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________

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.

_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________
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.