On 19-May-07, at 9:56 AM, Danny Younger wrote:
... and what has been the response of those of you that claim to represent the public interest?
1. It would be good to get a sense from other regions on how their users were impacted and what if anything they have published on the issue. 2. The issue is a consumer protection issue - one that ICANN has long ignored. It know needs to take steps to improve registrar compliance and help educate the public on the issue. 3. With the proposed 07/08 budget just out - it might be worthwhile for all the At-large regions to comb through it and identify what areas could be improved from a user perspective. A couple of points to raise on the budget: * Taking the RegisterFly issue into consideration, we could make sure that ICANN budgets appropriately to ensure they have the staff and internal resources needed to deal with a similiar problem. * ALAC could propose ways to collaborate with ICANN to enable greater participation of individual users at all ICANN meetings by focusing on virtual means as well as outreach. Individual domain name holders should have materials that help it understand how ICANN works, and yes - how to get in touch with local and/or regional At-large structures. And finally, 4. Active ALAC members have indeed discussed the RegisterFly issue... from the Lisbon meeting transcript... Ref: http://blog.icann.org/?p=87 specifically: Vittorio Bertola (ICANN Board member, ALAC) http://blog.icann.org/?p=87#bertola Patrick Vande Walle (European RALO member, ISOC BoT) http://blog.icann.org/?p=87#vandewalle As for recommendations on what ALAC could do, see Elliot Noss's (President and CEO, Tucows, a registrar) comment: http://blog.icann.org/?p=87#noss Would be interesting to hear back from ALAC and the ALS's that might have been in Lisbon. Did they hear Noss's comments, and if so what do they think about them? I believe a window of opportunity exists for At-Large to be involved in a leading consumer protection issue. An opportunity exists to collaborate with one of the leading registrars on this - will it care to do so? _________________________________________ Luc Faubert Conseiller en gouvernance TI et en gestion du changement / IT governance and change management consulting +1 514 236 5129 www.LucFaubert.com www.LucFaubert.com/blog www.isoc.qc.ca www.ccig.ca www.uqbm.qc.ca www.maillons.qc.ca
-----Original Message----- From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger@yahoo.com] Sent: 19 mai 2007 09:56 To: Luc Faubert; Wendy Seltzer; Bret Fausett Cc: NA Discuss; na-als@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Will the Real At-Large Please Stand Up
Ever since the RegisterFly mess started to become apparent (an event that has impacted hundreds of thousands of registrations), ICANN has been in receipt of hundreds upon hundreds of comments from an angry community.
Comments have been sent to the ICANN blog, to the public participation site, to the ALAC Forum...
... and what has been the response of those of you that claim to represent the public interest?
Discussions pertaining to dealing with the policy issues raised by the RegisterFly event on every single RALO list have been almost nil. This is pathetic. You should be ashamed. You should be embarrassed.
Do any of you really care about the at-large, or are you just playing at Internet Governance?
If you do care, then show me the proof of your resolve. I want to see a policy recommendation and/or issues report on all those matters that have affected this registrant community. I want to see discussion. To do any less will thoroughly demonstrate the total farce that "structure-building" represents while a fire is burning in your midst.
______________________________________________________________ ______________________ Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367