Draft comment on the Fundamental Bylaw change.
I was asked to draft the comment for the ALAC's response to the Public Comment on the Fundamental Bylaw Change (https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=111384218). The Public Comment closes this Friday at 23:59 UTC. (about 50 hours from now) =================================== The ALAC supported the current version of the ICANN Bylaws Section 18.7(a) and 18.7(b), but understands that it has now proven to be difficult to implement. The ALAC agrees that the proposed change preserves the intent of the original Fundamental Bylaw and supports the change. Subject to any new information being brought to the ALAC's attention, the current intention is that the ALAC will support this Fundamental Bylaw change when it is present to the Empowered Community.
I understand the problem to be solved but don't like the wording of the replacement. Why should non-ccNSO-member ccTLD managers even be eligible? There is precious little incentive for ccTLD registries to have anything to do with ICANN. Eligibility for selection here ought to be part of such incentive. They should just change "Two" to "Three" in 18.7(a) and drop 18.7(b) entirely. No other rewording is needed. - Evan On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 at 18:18, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I was asked to draft the comment for the ALAC's response to the Public Comment on the Fundamental Bylaw Change (https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=111384218).
The Public Comment closes this Friday at 23:59 UTC. (about 50 hours from now)
===================================
The ALAC supported the current version of the ICANN Bylaws Section 18.7(a) and 18.7(b), but understands that it has now proven to be difficult to implement.
The ALAC agrees that the proposed change preserves the intent of the original Fundamental Bylaw and supports the change.
Subject to any new information being brought to the ALAC's attention, the current intention is that the ALAC will support this Fundamental Bylaw change when it is present to the Empowered Community.
_______________________________________________ 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. _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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.
-- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch or @el56
agreed From: ALAC <alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> Date: Wednesday, July 24, 2019 at 10:36 PM To: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org>, ALAC <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [ALAC] [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] Draft comment on the Fundamental Bylaw change. I understand the problem to be solved but don't like the wording of the replacement. Why should non-ccNSO-member ccTLD managers even be eligible? There is precious little incentive for ccTLD registries to have anything to do with ICANN. Eligibility for selection here ought to be part of such incentive. They should just change "Two" to "Three" in 18.7(a) and drop 18.7(b) entirely. No other rewording is needed. - Evan On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 at 18:18, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>> wrote: I was asked to draft the comment for the ALAC's response to the Public Comment on the Fundamental Bylaw Change (https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=111384218). The Public Comment closes this Friday at 23:59 UTC. (about 50 hours from now) =================================== The ALAC supported the current version of the ICANN Bylaws Section 18.7(a) and 18.7(b), but understands that it has now proven to be difficult to implement. The ALAC agrees that the proposed change preserves the intent of the original Fundamental Bylaw and supports the change. Subject to any new information being brought to the ALAC's attention, the current intention is that the ALAC will support this Fundamental Bylaw change when it is present to the Empowered Community. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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. _______________________________________________ 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 Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs _______________________________________________ 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. -- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch or @el56
Evan, I have some sympathy for your argumentation, but am nevertheless in favour of the proposed formulation for a few reasons that I will try to detail below. I think that ICANN has won the ccNSO battle. If we go back a few years, there was a substantial objection to join the ccNSO, even by major ccTLDs, with the argument that they did not need ICANN, substantiated by the fact that their existence and relationship with IANA predates ICANN, and things were working properly even before. Now more and more ccTLDs are joining the ccNSO and I would argue that there is no longer an organised objection to the ccNSO itself. About the change from the current formulation to the proposed one, I observe that we move from the obligation to have a non-ccNSO participant to the recommendation not to exclude them in the choice of the three representatives. This, IMHO, will bring to a situation in which most of the times the representatives will be ccNSO members, because they are the ones that are more aware of what is going on and more willing to devote time and resources to a volunteer job, but leaves the door open to the possibility that, in case we have some interested folks among the non-ccNSO ccTLD managers, one of them could get the position. I am sure that the ccNSO itself will make sure that the majority of the representatives are ccNSO members. This said, we still have not solved the other issue: if it is recognised that a service is provided to the ccTLD community, why is the financial participation left to voluntary contributions? But I am not saying this loud because I know that it will (re-)open a big can of worms. Cheers, Roberto On 25.07.2019, at 07:35, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>> wrote: I understand the problem to be solved but don't like the wording of the replacement. Why should non-ccNSO-member ccTLD managers even be eligible? There is precious little incentive for ccTLD registries to have anything to do with ICANN. Eligibility for selection here ought to be part of such incentive. They should just change "Two" to "Three" in 18.7(a) and drop 18.7(b) entirely. No other rewording is needed. - Evan On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 at 18:18, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>> wrote: I was asked to draft the comment for the ALAC's response to the Public Comment on the Fundamental Bylaw Change (https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=111384218). The Public Comment closes this Friday at 23:59 UTC. (about 50 hours from now) =================================== The ALAC supported the current version of the ICANN Bylaws Section 18.7(a) and 18.7(b), but understands that it has now proven to be difficult to implement. The ALAC agrees that the proposed change preserves the intent of the original Fundamental Bylaw and supports the change. Subject to any new information being brought to the ALAC's attention, the current intention is that the ALAC will support this Fundamental Bylaw change when it is present to the Empowered Community. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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. _______________________________________________ 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 Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs _______________________________________________ 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. -- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch or @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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._______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg _______________________________________________ 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.
Hi Roberto and Alan, Thanks for the explanations. I understand and withdraw my objection. I'll even overlook the weird math in Alan's description of ccNSO growth :-). - Evan On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 13:22, Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> wrote:
Evan, I have some sympathy for your argumentation, but am nevertheless in favour of the proposed formulation for a few reasons that I will try to detail below. I think that ICANN has won the ccNSO battle. If we go back a few years, there was a substantial objection to join the ccNSO, even by major ccTLDs, with the argument that they did not need ICANN, substantiated by the fact that their existence and relationship with IANA predates ICANN, and things were working properly even before. Now more and more ccTLDs are joining the ccNSO and I would argue that there is no longer an organised objection to the ccNSO itself. About the change from the current formulation to the proposed one, I observe that we move from the obligation to have a non-ccNSO participant to the recommendation not to exclude them in the choice of the three representatives. This, IMHO, will bring to a situation in which most of the times the representatives will be ccNSO members, because they are the ones that are more aware of what is going on and more willing to devote time and resources to a volunteer job, but leaves the door open to the possibility that, in case we have some interested folks among the non-ccNSO ccTLD managers, one of them could get the position. I am sure that the ccNSO itself will make sure that the majority of the representatives are ccNSO members.
This said, we still have not solved the other issue: if it is recognised that a service is provided to the ccTLD community, why is the financial participation left to voluntary contributions? But I am not saying this loud because I know that it will (re-)open a big can of worms.
Cheers, Roberto
On 25.07.2019, at 07:35, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
I understand the problem to be solved but don't like the wording of the replacement.
Why should non-ccNSO-member ccTLD managers even be eligible?
There is precious little incentive for ccTLD registries to have anything to do with ICANN. Eligibility for selection here ought to be part of such incentive.
They should just change "Two" to "Three" in 18.7(a) and drop 18.7(b) entirely. No other rewording is needed.
- Evan
On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 at 18:18, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I was asked to draft the comment for the ALAC's response to the Public Comment on the Fundamental Bylaw Change (https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=111384218).
The Public Comment closes this Friday at 23:59 UTC. (about 50 hours from now)
===================================
The ALAC supported the current version of the ICANN Bylaws Section 18.7(a) and 18.7(b), but understands that it has now proven to be difficult to implement.
The ALAC agrees that the proposed change preserves the intent of the original Fundamental Bylaw and supports the change.
Subject to any new information being brought to the ALAC's attention, the current intention is that the ALAC will support this Fundamental Bylaw change when it is present to the Empowered Community.
_______________________________________________ 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. _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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.
-- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch or @el56 _______________________________________________ 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._______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
_______________________________________________ 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._______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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.
-- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch or @el56
participants (4)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Evan Leibovitch -
Jonathan Zuck -
Roberto Gaetano