Re: [CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] [GTLD-WG] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions
I'm not sure the issue is that important, but for the record, looking at the GoogleDoc reporting matrix (where you might go to verify your own replies), or even looking at entries in the traditional PC mailing list archive is one or more orders of magnitude easier than pro-actively seeking out our mailing lists and wiki sites. Alan At 22/12/2018 06:34 PM, Jonathan Zuck wrote: I must confess I don't find this compelling. Our wiki is not private. If Google wanted they could be scraping that. Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.Innovatorsnetwork.org> ________________________________ From: GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2018 2:37:13 PM To: Christopher Wilkinson Cc: cpwg@icann.org Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions +1 Christopher On 19.12.2018, at 17:49, cw@christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:cw@christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote: Dar Evin, Dear Friends and Colleagues: Thankyou, Noted. However, this does not really address the issue. I am not concerned about Google having access to ‘my' personal comments and posting (which I understand I could protect from Google’s prying eyes by using the Word or .pdf forms.) The issue is that Goggle would have precocious and privileged access to (most of) the ensemble of community comments. Google is one of a a few major platforms which are interested parties. (a) how can one protect the independence of ICANN’s decisions if one of the major interested parties has prior knowledge of the community’s debates and (b) if Google can have that information only by virtue of offering a ’google forms’ service; what is to prevent the information being shared with Google’s competitors?
Google … automatically sorts and organises answers to questions…
… which tacitly confirms that significant political and administrative power over EPDP is being transferred to a non-neutral platform. Regards CW On 19 Dec 2018, at 16:12, Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu@icann.org<mailto:evin.erdogdu@icann.org> > wrote: Dear All, Further to the AI from today’s CPWG call, please see below feedback on EPDP form community questions. Thanks to all for productive feedback regarding the form. * Community concern about the Google Form “harvesting all the information” submitted via the form. It was noted ICANN org and community use forms already, but this would be first time for public comment process. The comments are also public, but the concern was Google retention of the data. Any ALAC members concerned with Google’s retention of data may submit comments by filling out the word version of the form and sending it to At-Large Staffstaff<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> @atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. * Alternatives to the form. It was noted that for some in the world (i.e. in China), Google products are not available. Is there an official alternative submission method? One could use a Word Doc or PDF of the form. In general, the community wanted to know rationale for using Google forms for the whole process, as opposed to a fillable PDF, or Word doc template for comments? To facilitate offline work, or for those who may not have access to the form, you may download an offline version of the form here: https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co... . Please submit completed forms to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received. For more information, anyone interested may refer to the EPDP Leadership webinar<https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2018-11-29+EPDP+Initial+Report+...>, during which the rationale for and explanation of the Google Form is described. * Public visibility of draft mode. It was noted you may save progress on the Google Form, then submit later, but that the saved work was public. This was seen as undesirable by many in the community. Is there a way to not have the draft/saved form public; only have the final submission public? Commenters have the option of using the word version to work offline and then can complete the Google form when finished. We are not aware of a way to save progress privately on Google Forms. * Concerns with mistakes in the form submission process. The suggested alternative to the above was working from a Word doc, then copying + pasting over. The concern was the potential for mistakes. If mistakes are made on the submission, as is currently done, would it be possible to remove or revise the submission to public comment? Yes. Commenters are able to edit their previous submission by following prompts in the email they will receive from Google. If the commenter would like to delete a submission, please notify policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>, and EPDP Staff Support can assist. Kind Regards, Evin _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
10 to 20 times easier? For an interested party? I call BS Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.Innovatorsnetwork.org> ________________________________ From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2018 7:26:57 PM To: Jonathan Zuck; Christopher Wilkinson; Roberto Gaetano Cc: cpwg@icann.org Subject: Re: [registration-issues-wg] [CPWG] [GTLD-WG] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions I'm not sure the issue is that important, but for the record, looking at the GoogleDoc reporting matrix (where you might go to verify your own replies), or even looking at entries in the traditional PC mailing list archive is one or more orders of magnitude easier than pro-actively seeking out our mailing lists and wiki sites. Alan At 22/12/2018 06:34 PM, Jonathan Zuck wrote: I must confess I don't find this compelling. Our wiki is not private. If Google wanted they could be scraping that. Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.Innovatorsnetwork.org> ________________________________ From: GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2018 2:37:13 PM To: Christopher Wilkinson Cc: cpwg@icann.org Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions +1 Christopher On 19.12.2018, at 17:49, cw@christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:cw@christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote: Dar Evin, Dear Friends and Colleagues: Thankyou, Noted. However, this does not really address the issue. I am not concerned about Google having access to ‘my' personal comments and posting (which I understand I could protect from Google’s prying eyes by using the Word or .pdf forms.) The issue is that Goggle would have precocious and privileged access to (most of) the ensemble of community comments. Google is one of a a few major platforms which are interested parties. (a) how can one protect the independence of ICANN’s decisions if one of the major interested parties has prior knowledge of the community’s debates and (b) if Google can have that information only by virtue of offering a ’google forms’ service; what is to prevent the information being shared with Google’s competitors?
Google … automatically sorts and organises answers to questions…
… which tacitly confirms that significant political and administrative power over EPDP is being transferred to a non-neutral platform. Regards CW On 19 Dec 2018, at 16:12, Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu@icann.org<mailto:evin.erdogdu@icann.org> > wrote: Dear All, Further to the AI from today’s CPWG call, please see below feedback on EPDP form community questions. Thanks to all for productive feedback regarding the form. * Community concern about the Google Form “harvesting all the information” submitted via the form. It was noted ICANN org and community use forms already, but this would be first time for public comment process. The comments are also public, but the concern was Google retention of the data. Any ALAC members concerned with Google’s retention of data may submit comments by filling out the word version of the form and sending it to At-Large Staffstaff<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> @atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. * Alternatives to the form. It was noted that for some in the world (i.e. in China), Google products are not available. Is there an official alternative submission method? One could use a Word Doc or PDF of the form. In general, the community wanted to know rationale for using Google forms for the whole process, as opposed to a fillable PDF, or Word doc template for comments? To facilitate offline work, or for those who may not have access to the form, you may download an offline version of the form here: https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co... . Please submit completed forms to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received. For more information, anyone interested may refer to the EPDP Leadership webinar<https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2018-11-29+EPDP+Initial+Report+...>, during which the rationale for and explanation of the Google Form is described. * Public visibility of draft mode. It was noted you may save progress on the Google Form, then submit later, but that the saved work was public. This was seen as undesirable by many in the community. Is there a way to not have the draft/saved form public; only have the final submission public? Commenters have the option of using the word version to work offline and then can complete the Google form when finished. We are not aware of a way to save progress privately on Google Forms. * Concerns with mistakes in the form submission process. The suggested alternative to the above was working from a Word doc, then copying + pasting over. The concern was the potential for mistakes. If mistakes are made on the submission, as is currently done, would it be possible to remove or revise the submission to public comment? Yes. Commenters are able to edit their previous submission by following prompts in the email they will receive from Google. If the commenter would like to delete a submission, please notify policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>, and EPDP Staff Support can assist. Kind Regards, Evin _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
I agree with you Alan. Another reason why it’s better not to use Google is that some regions in the world can’t access Google (China for example). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tijani BEN JEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) Phone: +216 98 330 114 +216 52 385 114 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Le 24 déc. 2018 à 01:26, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca <mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>> a écrit :
I'm not sure the issue is that important, but for the record, looking at the GoogleDoc reporting matrix (where you might go to verify your own replies), or even looking at entries in the traditional PC mailing list archive is one or more orders of magnitude easier than pro-actively seeking out our mailing lists and wiki sites.
Alan
At 22/12/2018 06:34 PM, Jonathan Zuck wrote:
I must confess I don't find this compelling. Our wiki is not private. If Google wanted they could be scraping that.
Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org <http://www.innovatorsnetwork.org/>
From: GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>> on behalf of Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com <mailto:roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com>> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2018 2:37:13 PM To: Christopher Wilkinson Cc: cpwg@icann.org <mailto:cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions
+1 Christopher
On 19.12.2018, at 17:49, cw@christopherwilkinson.eu <mailto:cw@christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote:
Dar Evin, Dear Friends and Colleagues:
Thankyou, Noted. However, this does not really address the issue.
I am not concerned about Google having access to ‘my' personal comments and posting (which I understand I could protect from Google’s prying eyes by using the Word or .pdf forms.)
The issue is that Goggle would have precocious and privileged access to (most of) the ensemble of community comments.
Google is one of a a few major platforms which are interested parties. (a) how can one protect the independence of ICANN’s decisions if one of the major interested parties has prior knowledge of the community’s debates and (b) if Google can have that information only by virtue of offering a ’google forms’ service; what is to prevent the information being shared with Google’s competitors?
Google … automatically sorts and organises answers to questions…
… which tacitly confirms that significant political and administrative power over EPDP is being transferred to a non-neutral platform.
Regards
CW
On 19 Dec 2018, at 16:12, Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu@icann.org <mailto:evin.erdogdu@icann.org> > wrote:
Dear All,
Further to the AI from today’s CPWG call, please see below feedback on EPDP form community questions.
Thanks to all for productive feedback regarding the form.
Community concern about the Google Form “harvesting all the information” submitted via the form. It was noted ICANN org and community use forms already, but this would be first time for public comment process. The comments are also public, but the concern was Google retention of the data.
Any ALAC members concerned with Google’s retention of data may submit comments by filling out the word version of the form and sending it to At-Large Staffstaff <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> @atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org <mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>.
Alternatives to the form. It was noted that for some in the world (i.e. in China), Google products are not available. Is there an official alternative submission method? One could use a Word Doc or PDF of the form. In general, the community wanted to know rationale for using Google forms for the whole process, as opposed to a fillable PDF, or Word doc template for comments?
To facilitate offline work, or for those who may not have access to the form, you may download an offline version of the form here:https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co... <https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co...> . Please submit completed forms to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org <mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>.
EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received.
For more information, anyone interested may refer to the EPDP Leadership webinar <https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2018-11-29+EPDP+Initial+Report+...>, during which the rationale for and explanation of the Google Form is described.
Public visibility of draft mode. It was noted you may save progress on the Google Form, then submit later, but that the saved work was public. This was seen as undesirable by many in the community. Is there a way to not have the draft/saved form public; only have the final submission public?
Commenters have the option of using the word version to work offline and then can complete the Google form when finished. We are not aware of a way to save progress privately on Google Forms.
Concerns with mistakes in the form submission process. The suggested alternative to the above was working from a Word doc, then copying + pasting over. The concern was the potential for mistakes. If mistakes are made on the submission, as is currently done, would it be possible to remove or revise the submission to public comment?
Yes. Commenters are able to edit their previous submission by following prompts in the email they will receive from Google. If the commenter would like to delete a submission, please notify policy-staff@icann.org <mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>, and EPDP Staff Support can assist.
Kind Regards, Evin
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg> _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg>
CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg> _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg>
CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg>
_______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg>_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg>
GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg>
Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs>
Agree with both Alan and Tijani - let’s make it as easy for ourselves as possible Holly
On Dec 24, 2018, at 4:54 PM, Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa@benjemaa.com> wrote:
I agree with you Alan. Another reason why it’s better not to use Google is that some regions in the world can’t access Google (China for example).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tijani BEN JEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) Phone: +216 98 330 114 +216 52 385 114 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Le 24 déc. 2018 à 01:26, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca <mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>> a écrit :
I'm not sure the issue is that important, but for the record, looking at the GoogleDoc reporting matrix (where you might go to verify your own replies), or even looking at entries in the traditional PC mailing list archive is one or more orders of magnitude easier than pro-actively seeking out our mailing lists and wiki sites.
Alan
At 22/12/2018 06:34 PM, Jonathan Zuck wrote:
I must confess I don't find this compelling. Our wiki is not private. If Google wanted they could be scraping that.
Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org <http://www.innovatorsnetwork.org/>
From: GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>> on behalf of Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com <mailto:roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com>> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2018 2:37:13 PM To: Christopher Wilkinson Cc: cpwg@icann.org <mailto:cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions
+1 Christopher
On 19.12.2018, at 17:49, cw@christopherwilkinson.eu <mailto:cw@christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote:
Dar Evin, Dear Friends and Colleagues:
Thankyou, Noted. However, this does not really address the issue.
I am not concerned about Google having access to ‘my' personal comments and posting (which I understand I could protect from Google’s prying eyes by using the Word or .pdf forms.)
The issue is that Goggle would have precocious and privileged access to (most of) the ensemble of community comments.
Google is one of a a few major platforms which are interested parties. (a) how can one protect the independence of ICANN’s decisions if one of the major interested parties has prior knowledge of the community’s debates and (b) if Google can have that information only by virtue of offering a ’google forms’ service; what is to prevent the information being shared with Google’s competitors?
Google … automatically sorts and organises answers to questions…
… which tacitly confirms that significant political and administrative power over EPDP is being transferred to a non-neutral platform.
Regards
CW
On 19 Dec 2018, at 16:12, Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu@icann.org <mailto:evin.erdogdu@icann.org> > wrote:
Dear All,
Further to the AI from today’s CPWG call, please see below feedback on EPDP form community questions.
Thanks to all for productive feedback regarding the form.
Community concern about the Google Form “harvesting all the information” submitted via the form. It was noted ICANN org and community use forms already, but this would be first time for public comment process. The comments are also public, but the concern was Google retention of the data.
Any ALAC members concerned with Google’s retention of data may submit comments by filling out the word version of the form and sending it to At-Large Staffstaff <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> @atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org <mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>.
Alternatives to the form. It was noted that for some in the world (i.e. in China), Google products are not available. Is there an official alternative submission method? One could use a Word Doc or PDF of the form. In general, the community wanted to know rationale for using Google forms for the whole process, as opposed to a fillable PDF, or Word doc template for comments?
To facilitate offline work, or for those who may not have access to the form, you may download an offline version of the form here:https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co... <https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co...> . Please submit completed forms to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org <mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>.
EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received.
For more information, anyone interested may refer to the EPDP Leadership webinar <https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2018-11-29+EPDP+Initial+Report+...>, during which the rationale for and explanation of the Google Form is described.
Public visibility of draft mode. It was noted you may save progress on the Google Form, then submit later, but that the saved work was public. This was seen as undesirable by many in the community. Is there a way to not have the draft/saved form public; only have the final submission public?
Commenters have the option of using the word version to work offline and then can complete the Google form when finished. We are not aware of a way to save progress privately on Google Forms.
Concerns with mistakes in the form submission process. The suggested alternative to the above was working from a Word doc, then copying + pasting over. The concern was the potential for mistakes. If mistakes are made on the submission, as is currently done, would it be possible to remove or revise the submission to public comment?
Yes. Commenters are able to edit their previous submission by following prompts in the email they will receive from Google. If the commenter would like to delete a submission, please notify policy-staff@icann.org <mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>, and EPDP Staff Support can assist.
Kind Regards, Evin
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg> _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg>
CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg> _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg>
CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg>
_______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg>_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg>
GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg>
Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs>
CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
My First Ever Review of all Top 10 New GTLD’s. PLUS The List of 350++ New GTLD extensions that will go BYE BYE!! The Birdie in the Mine is DEAD!! http://vu.fr/BBR <http://vu.fr/BBR> Short URL SeB
Thanks for sharing, Seb. ...Um, ...."whistling past the graveyard"...he calls it! I'm sure folks will not like either what he says or how its said but call that man consistent as a bad habit and, like he said, numbers don't lie..... I confess I'm not a tea leaf reader or diviner-by-entrails but these numbers sure seem to be telling a story..... .....meanwhile, like the Titanic's band, the *let's-get-the-next-round-started-already* group ......and the *let's-get-ready-to-rumble SubPro WG*......labours on.... CAS On Sun, 6 Jan 2019, 10:14 am Sebastien Bachollet <sebicann@bachollet.fr wrote:
My First Ever Review of all Top 10 New GTLD’s. PLUS The List of 350++ New GTLD extensions that will go BYE BYE!! The Birdie in the Mine is DEAD!!
Short URL
SeB _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs
Thanks for this, Sebastien. Interesting indeed. The only real surprise is how At-Large continues to support the continued expansion of gTLDs in the face of clear evidence of failure of the last iteration. Tweak a priority here and a criteria there, ALAC says, and it's all OK so far as the world of internet users is concerned. At very least we have an obligation to our bylaw-defined constituency to demand that ICANN justify this folly before we even participate. But not even that is worth asserting, apparently... We're the last bastion of critical pushback against what ICANN has become, but have abdicated in full public view. Disgraceful. ___________________ Evan Leibovitch, Toronto @evanleibovitch/@el56 On Sun., Jan. 6, 2019, 10:14 a.m. Sebastien Bachollet <sebicann@bachollet.fr wrote:
My First Ever Review of all Top 10 New GTLD’s. PLUS The List of 350++ New GTLD extensions that will go BYE BYE!! The Birdie in the Mine is DEAD!!
Short URL
SeB _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs
participants (7)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Carlton Samuels -
Evan Leibovitch -
Holly Raiche -
Jonathan Zuck -
Sebastien Bachollet -
Tijani BEN JEMAA