Kieren, Thanks for the comment. Our elections are critical and getting them right is even more important. As far as reporting goes I would like to draw your attention to this document: http://www.knujon.com/icann_compliance_2012.pdf which shows that ICANN's internal compliance function is essentially non-functional regardless of recently published data by ICANN. This was a follow up to a report sent directly to the CEO (http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/bruen-to-chehade-22apr13-en.pdf ) which has not been responded to. ICANN is failing the public At-Large and won't discuss these core concerns, has been completely silent on them. I think you can help by raising your voice to ask about them as well from within our community. There is a very long report log here: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Durban+Meeting+Reports+ Workspace which is being constantly updated by At-Large representatives, even remote ones. Working groups regularly give reports on our monthly calls. We'd love to have you come on and give your perspective, let me know. So, it's not really a question of reporting from At-Large, it's more of a question of why we have to leave our families and travel thousands of miles just to be ignored by ICANN. It's really not that much fun. If the problems could be solved and questions answered, we wouldn't have to go at all. -Garth -----Original Message----- From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Kieren McCarthy Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2013 11:09 PM To: na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] VOTE RESULTS: 2013 NARALO Secretary Selection I wish as much time, energy and effort had gone into informing us about the meeting you were paid as our representatives to attend last week in Durban as has been out into bickering about voting procedures. Kieren [from mobile device] On Jul 21, 2013, at 7:19 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

Tom,

I presume that by "incumbent" you mean people in office such as the ALAC members or ALAC Chair (usually it is used referring to the person who is in office but is in a contested election).

I guess our experiences are different. Certainly someone who is part of a current organization is familiar with the others who may be in a contested election. But KNOW is definitely not the same as TRUST and not infrequently KNOW is synonymous with wanting someone new. (And I am not implying anything about the people in the current election).

Alan

At 21/07/2013 02:34 PM, toml@communisphere.com wrote:

...

Alan,

What I am trying to say is that incumbents will better know and trust a known player. Amopholy (sp?), might describe the human response that Option 4 draws upon. There are both good and bad associated with this. Random is life.

Best,

T9m Lowenhaupt

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

Thanks Danny, it's actually even worse than most are aware of. Hope to have more details soon. From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 12:51 PM To: Garth Bruen; 'Kieren McCarthy'; na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] VOTE RESULTS: 2013 NARALO Secretary Selection Garth, Thanks for the update. Having read your report and having noted the June Compliance update (1892 complaints - 4 enforcement actions), it's fairly clear that the primary function of the Compliance department is two-fold: (1) citing registrars for "Failure to pay past due accreditation fees pursuant to Section 3.9 of the RAA" and (2) sweeping everything else under the rug. I appreciate your ongoing efforts to deal with this matter. Danny Younger _____ From: Garth Bruen <gbruen@knujon.com> To: 'Kieren McCarthy' <kierenmccarthy@gmail.com>; na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 12:15 PM Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] VOTE RESULTS: 2013 NARALO Secretary Selection Kieren, Thanks for the comment. Our elections are critical and getting them right is even more important. As far as reporting goes I would like to draw your attention to this document: http://www.knujon.com/icann_compliance_2012.pdf <http://www.knujon.com/icann_compliance_2012.pdf> which shows that ICANN's internal compliance function is essentially non-functional regardless of recently published data by ICANN. This was a follow up to a report sent directly to the CEO (http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/bruen-to-chehade-22apr13-en.pdf ) which has not been responded to. ICANN is failing the public At-Large and won't discuss these core concerns, has been completely silent on them. I think you can help by raising your voice to ask about them as well from within our community. There is a very long report log here: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Durban+Meeting+Reports+ Workspace which is being constantly updated by At-Large representatives, even remote ones. Working groups regularly give reports on our monthly calls. We'd love to have you come on and give your perspective, let me know. So, it's not really a question of reporting from At-Large, it's more of a question of why we have to leave our families and travel thousands of miles just to be ignored by ICANN. It's really not that much fun. If the problems could be solved and questions answered, we wouldn't have to go at all. -Garth -----Original Message----- From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Kieren McCarthy Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2013 11:09 PM To: na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] VOTE RESULTS: 2013 NARALO Secretary Selection I wish as much time, energy and effort had gone into informing us about the meeting you were paid as our representatives to attend last week in Durban as has been out into bickering about voting procedures. Kieren [from mobile device] On Jul 21, 2013, at 7:19 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

Tom,

I presume that by "incumbent" you mean people in office such as the ALAC members or ALAC Chair (usually it is used referring to the person who is in office but is in a contested election).

I guess our experiences are different. Certainly someone who is part of a current organization is familiar with the others who may be in a contested election. But KNOW is definitely not the same as TRUST and not infrequently KNOW is synonymous with wanting someone new. (And I am not implying anything about the people in the current election).

Alan

At 21/07/2013 02:34 PM, toml@communisphere.com wrote:

...

Alan,

What I am trying to say is that incumbents will better know and trust a known player. Amopholy (sp?), might describe the human response that Option 4 draws upon. There are both good and bad associated with this. Random is life.

Best,

T9m Lowenhaupt

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org <http://www.naralo.org/> ------

NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org <http://www.naralo.org/> ------ ------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org <http://www.naralo.org/> ------

Hi Evan, He made the same announcement when he first took office. I guess somehow he forgot that or lost the reporting chain. --bob On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Evan Leibovitch wrote:

Fadi made a specific point that Complance will report directly to him during the speech in which he announced the spin off of the gTLD mess^H^H^H^Hexpansion into a separate division.

It's probably time for the ALAC to issue specific advice to the Board and CEO to take care of this backlog. Copy to ATRT2, as IMO this is a massive accountability issue.

I propose us collectively writing such a formal statement of advice, to be agreed to by NARALO consensus and then advanced to ALAC (which I would commit to do).

On 23 July 2013 11:52, Garth Bruen <gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:

...

Thanks Danny, it's actually even worse than most are aware of. Hope to have more details soon.

From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 12:51 PM To: Garth Bruen; 'Kieren McCarthy'; na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] VOTE RESULTS: 2013 NARALO Secretary Selection

Garth,

Thanks for the update. Having read your report and having noted the June Compliance update (1892 complaints - 4 enforcement actions), it's fairly clear that the primary function of the Compliance department is two-fold: (1) citing registrars for "Failure to pay past due accreditation fees pursuant to Section 3.9 of the RAA" and (2) sweeping everything else under the rug.

I appreciate your ongoing efforts to deal with this matter.

Danny Younger

_____

From: Garth Bruen <gbruen@knujon.com> To: 'Kieren McCarthy' <kierenmccarthy@gmail.com>; na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 12:15 PM Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] VOTE RESULTS: 2013 NARALO Secretary Selection

Kieren,

Thanks for the comment. Our elections are critical and getting them right is even more important.

As far as reporting goes I would like to draw your attention to this document: http://www.knujon.com/icann_compliance_2012.pdf <http://www.knujon.com/icann_compliance_2012.pdf> which shows that ICANN's internal compliance function is essentially non-functional regardless of recently published data by ICANN. This was a follow up to a report sent directly to the CEO ( http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/bruen-to-chehade-22apr13-en.pdf ) which has not been responded to.

ICANN is failing the public At-Large and won't discuss these core concerns, has been completely silent on them. I think you can help by raising your voice to ask about them as well from within our community.

There is a very long report log here:

https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Durban+Meeting+Reports+ Workspace which is being constantly updated by At-Large representatives, even remote ones. Working groups regularly give reports on our monthly calls. We'd love to have you come on and give your perspective, let me know.

So, it's not really a question of reporting from At-Large, it's more of a question of why we have to leave our families and travel thousands of miles just to be ignored by ICANN. It's really not that much fun. If the problems could be solved and questions answered, we wouldn't have to go at all.

-Garth

-----Original Message----- From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Kieren McCarthy Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2013 11:09 PM To: na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] VOTE RESULTS: 2013 NARALO Secretary Selection

I wish as much time, energy and effort had gone into informing us about the meeting you were paid as our representatives to attend last week in Durban as has been out into bickering about voting procedures.

Kieren

[from mobile device]

On Jul 21, 2013, at 7:19 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

...

Tom,

I presume that by "incumbent" you mean people in office such as the ALAC members or ALAC Chair (usually it is used referring to the person who is in office but is in a contested election).

I guess our experiences are different. Certainly someone who is part of a current organization is familiar with the others who may be in a contested election. But KNOW is definitely not the same as TRUST and not infrequently KNOW is synonymous with wanting someone new. (And I am not implying anything about the people in the current election).

Alan

At 21/07/2013 02:34 PM, toml@communisphere.com wrote:

...

Alan,

What I am trying to say is that incumbents will better know and trust a known player. Amopholy (sp?), might describe the human response that Option 4 draws upon. There are both good and bad associated with this. Random is life.

Best,

T9m Lowenhaupt

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org <http://www.naralo.org/

------

---

NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org <http://www.naralo.org/> ------

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org <http://www.naralo.org/> ------

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

-- Dr. Robert Bruen Cold Rain Labs http://coldrain.net/bruen +1.802.579.6288

Alan, would a statement from the ALAC have any effect on the ATRT2 investigation of this? Is it aware how many cases have been closed without resolution? On 23 July 2013 13:03, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

This was not a new announcement but a re-affirmation that the reporting structure would continue as the gTLD structure is cleaved off. It is a relationship that the ATRT-2 is looking at carefully in its review of the WHOIS RT implementation review.

Alan

At 23/07/2013 12:17 PM, Bob Bruen wrote:

...

Hi Evan,

He made the same announcement when he first took office. I guess somehow he forgot that or lost the reporting chain.

--bob

On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Evan Leibovitch wrote:

Fadi made a specific point that Complance will report directly to him

...

during the speech in which he announced the spin off of the gTLD expansion into a separate division.

It's probably time for the ALAC to issue specific advice to the Board and CEO to take care of this backlog. Copy to ATRT2, as IMO this is a massive accountability issue.

I propose us collectively writing such a formal statement of advice, to be agreed to by NARALO consensus and then advanced to ALAC (which I would commit to do).

On 23 July 2013 11:52, Garth Bruen <gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:

Thanks Danny, it's actually even worse than most are aware of. Hope to

...

have more details soon.

From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger@yahoo.com**] Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 12:51 PM To: Garth Bruen; 'Kieren McCarthy'; na-discuss@atlarge-lists.** icann.org <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] VOTE RESULTS: 2013 NARALO Secretary Selection

Garth,

Thanks for the update. Having read your report and having noted the June Compliance update (1892 complaints - 4 enforcement actions), it's fairly clear that the primary function of the Compliance department is two-fold: (1) citing registrars for "Failure to pay past due accreditation fees pursuant to Section 3.9 of the RAA" and (2) sweeping everything else under the rug.

I appreciate your ongoing efforts to deal with this matter.

Danny Younger

_____

From: Garth Bruen <gbruen@knujon.com> To: 'Kieren McCarthy' <kierenmccarthy@gmail.com>; na-discuss@atlarge-lists.**icann.org<na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 12:15 PM Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] VOTE RESULTS: 2013 NARALO Secretary Selection

Kieren,

Thanks for the comment. Our elections are critical and getting them right is even more important.

As far as reporting goes I would like to draw your attention to this document: http://www.knujon.com/icann_**compliance_2012.pdf<http://www.knujon.com/icann_compliance_2012.pdf> <http://www.knujon.com/icann_**compliance_2012.pdf<http://www.knujon.com/icann_compliance_2012.pdf>> which shows that ICANN's internal compliance function is essentially non-functional regardless of recently published data by ICANN. This was a follow up to a report sent directly to the CEO ( http://www.icann.org/en/news/**correspondence/bruen-to-** chehade-22apr13-en.pdf<http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/bruen-to-chehade-22apr13-en.pdf> ) which has not been responded to.

ICANN is failing the public At-Large and won't discuss these core concerns, has been completely silent on them. I think you can help by raising your voice to ask about them as well from within our community.

There is a very long report log here:

https://community.icann.org/**display/atlarge/At-Large+** Durban+Meeting+Reports+<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Durban+Meeting+Reports+> Workspace which is being constantly updated by At-Large representatives, even remote ones. Working groups regularly give reports on our monthly calls. We'd love to have you come on and give your perspective, let me know.

So, it's not really a question of reporting from At-Large, it's more of a question of why we have to leave our families and travel thousands of miles just to be ignored by ICANN. It's really not that much fun. If the problems could be solved and questions answered, we wouldn't have to go at all.

-Garth

-----Original Message----- From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-**lists.icann.org<na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@**atlarge-lists.icann.org<na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>] On Behalf Of Kieren McCarthy Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2013 11:09 PM To: na-discuss@atlarge-lists.**icann.org<na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] VOTE RESULTS: 2013 NARALO Secretary Selection

I wish as much time, energy and effort had gone into informing us about the meeting you were paid as our representatives to attend last week in Durban as has been out into bickering about voting procedures.

Kieren

[from mobile device]

On Jul 21, 2013, at 7:19 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

Tom,

...

I presume that by "incumbent" you mean people in office such as the ALAC

members or ALAC Chair (usually it is used referring to the person who is in office but is in a contested election).

...

I guess our experiences are different. Certainly someone who is part of a

current organization is familiar with the others who may be in a contested election. But KNOW is definitely not the same as TRUST and not infrequently KNOW is synonymous with wanting someone new. (And I am not implying anything about the people in the current election).

...

Alan

At 21/07/2013 02:34 PM, toml@communisphere.com wrote:

...

Alan,

What I am trying to say is that incumbents will better know and trust a

known player. Amopholy (sp?), might describe the human response that

Option 4 draws upon. There are both good and bad associated with this. Random is life.

...

...

Best,

T9m Lowenhaupt

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.**icann.org<NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.**org/mailman/listinfo/na-**discuss<https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss>

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org < http://www.naralo.org/>>> ------

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.**icann.org<NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.**org/mailman/listinfo/na-**discuss<https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss>

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org < http://www.naralo.org/> ------

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.**icann.org<NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.**org/mailman/listinfo/na-**discuss<https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss>

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org < http://www.naralo.org/> ------

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.**icann.org<NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.**org/mailman/listinfo/na-**discuss<https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss>

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

-- Dr. Robert Bruen Cold Rain Labs http://coldrain.net/bruen +1.802.579.6288

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.**icann.org <NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.**org/mailman/listinfo/na-**discuss<https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss>

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

-- Evan Leibovitch Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56

Hi Kieren, I haven't forgotten your suggestion before the meeting for communicating back to the NARALO about the meeting. I heartily agree that for those of us who can't regularly attend meetings, it's super helpful to get a birds eye view analysis from our reps on the ground. IMO, that's low hanging fruit on the engagement continuum. Before attending, I imagined that I might send communications on the fly, but the way the schedule is constructed doesn't lend itself to reflection and synthesis. For example, on Sunday we were in meetings for 13 + hours straight. So, I quickly abandoned the idea of trying to report on the fly. However, I did leave with 31 pages of typed notes which I will wheedle down to one woman's guess at what will be of most interest to you and the rest of NARALO. One consequence of the travel and conference schedule was that I came back with a wicked cold. So, it may take me a few days to report back. Best Regards, Dharma Dailey On Jul 22, 2013, at 12:15 PM, "Garth Bruen" <gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:

Kieren,

Thanks for the comment. Our elections are critical and getting them right is even more important.

As far as reporting goes I would like to draw your attention to this document: http://www.knujon.com/icann_compliance_2012.pdf which shows that ICANN's internal compliance function is essentially non-functional regardless of recently published data by ICANN. This was a follow up to a report sent directly to the CEO (http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/bruen-to-chehade-22apr13-en.pdf ) which has not been responded to.

ICANN is failing the public At-Large and won't discuss these core concerns, has been completely silent on them. I think you can help by raising your voice to ask about them as well from within our community.

There is a very long report log here: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Durban+Meeting+Reports+ Workspace which is being constantly updated by At-Large representatives, even remote ones. Working groups regularly give reports on our monthly calls. We'd love to have you come on and give your perspective, let me know.

So, it's not really a question of reporting from At-Large, it's more of a question of why we have to leave our families and travel thousands of miles just to be ignored by ICANN. It's really not that much fun. If the problems could be solved and questions answered, we wouldn't have to go at all.

-Garth

-----Original Message----- From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Kieren McCarthy Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2013 11:09 PM To: na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] VOTE RESULTS: 2013 NARALO Secretary Selection

I wish as much time, energy and effort had gone into informing us about the meeting you were paid as our representatives to attend last week in Durban as has been out into bickering about voting procedures.

Kieren

[from mobile device]

On Jul 21, 2013, at 7:19 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

...

Tom,

I presume that by "incumbent" you mean people in office such as the ALAC members or ALAC Chair (usually it is used referring to the person who is in office but is in a contested election).

I guess our experiences are different. Certainly someone who is part of a current organization is familiar with the others who may be in a contested election. But KNOW is definitely not the same as TRUST and not infrequently KNOW is synonymous with wanting someone new. (And I am not implying anything about the people in the current election).

Alan

At 21/07/2013 02:34 PM, toml@communisphere.com wrote:

...

Alan,

What I am trying to say is that incumbents will better know and trust a known player. Amopholy (sp?), might describe the human response that Option 4 draws upon. There are both good and bad associated with this. Random is life.

Best,

T9m Lowenhaupt

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

---

NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

Ick. Gmail sent my mail without me pressing Send. A few other points I wanted to make: - On gTLD program metrics, I was pleasantly surprised to know that the Board accepted BOTH the GNSO and ALAC metrics in toto and has instructed staff to act on all of them. Some of you may know that I had taken the GNSO working group on metrics to task for producing a set of metrics that was self-serving and too limited in scope to properly measure the effectiveness of the gTLD expansion program. As a result I helped create a set of additional metrics -- some of which were explicitly rejected by the GNSO -- that better measured the end-user consequences of the expansion. Until last week it was unknown whether the Board would accept any of the supplemental ALAC-approved metrics. At its meeting Thursday the Board agreed to everything we asked for and gave the ALAC and GNSO metrics equal weight in its approval vote. - The meeting between the ALAC and ICANN Board<http://durban47.icann.org/node/39673> was IMO* very* enlightening. There is an increasing level of comfort between the two groups in a frank exchange of ideas, and a better sense that we are at least factoring into Board decisions even when they don't go completely our way. Some may find interesting an exchange for the last 15 or so minutes of the meeting in which almost no ALAC people spoke, most of the dialogue was between Fadi and Board members. - The budget for the second At-Large Summit -- tentatively scheduled for the London meeting in just under a year from now -- is generally approved. Congrats to NARALO's own Eduardo Diaz and the ATLAS2 team for building a sound case for the event. Now the challenge is for us to make best use of that week to inform and empower ALSs. (I'm personally not a fan of using that time for "capacity building", IMO that's not ICANN's role ... though high-quality accessible information on ICANN issues most certainly is) - One issue that was of especially personal interest to me is how the term "rights and responsibilities", that has been in frequent use within ICANN of late (in part thanks to ALAC keeping the issue at hand) has been occasionally changed to "benefits and responsibilities" in the new ICANN contracts with contracted parties. I personally raised this at thePublic Forum<http://durban47.icann.org/node/39853>(second question asked in the " general community issues" segment of the PF. The response? After what seemeed about a minute or so of deliberation with ICANN Counsel and other staff, Fadi answered "we'll get back to you". I intend to follow up. Many significant areas of interest to At-Large -- including the way Public Interest Commitments and Internationalized Domain Names will be handled -- were not resolved at Durban and we continue to be involved in those issues. ICANN is definitely feeling the aftermath of not having better categorized the gTLD applications in order to escalate those of greatest public benefit. So. I guess that's my report, Comments and questions welcomed. - Evan On 22 July 2013 16:08, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:

I did give an impromptu update on the week Friday during an ISOC conference call (help every week for North American chapters). I was still in Durban at the time, and the call quality is spotty. But, thanks to Joly, the report was recorded and is available at http://isoc-ny.org/p2/5802

My take is that the meeting was fairly positive, from the end-user PoV, for a couple of reasons:

- Fadi Chehade is breaking off the gTLD operations -- including the new expansion program -- into a semi-independent division that will let the rest of ICANN be less distracted by the expansion in dealing with issues such as directory services, registrant privacy versus accountability, IPV6, DNSSEC, and similar matters. Quite telling is the fact that contractual compliance was not split off into the new division and will repoprt directly to Fadi. This should make for less future obfuscation but I will remain skeptical until proven otherwise.

- On dotless domains and internally-conflicted domains (ie, .corp, .bar, .example), we scored what I would call a win. ALAC has been telling ICANN to heed its own SSAC advice (which is against deletaing such domains) but ICANN says the community is "split" and has ordered new business studies. During the ALAC meeting with the GAC, we asked the GAC to consider these issues seriously (it had not to that time been seen on the GAC's "radar", so to speak. The GAC communique issued at the end of the Durban meeting week was clear in supporting the community position backing the SSAC recommendations. -

On 22 July 2013 13:50, Dharma Dailey <dharma.dailey@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hi Kieren,

I haven't forgotten your suggestion before the meeting for communicating back to the NARALO about the meeting. I heartily agree that for those of us who can't regularly attend meetings, it's super helpful to get a birds eye view analysis from our reps on the ground. IMO, that's low hanging fruit on the engagement continuum. Before attending, I imagined that I might send communications on the fly, but the way the schedule is constructed doesn't lend itself to reflection and synthesis. For example, on Sunday we were in meetings for 13 + hours straight. So, I quickly abandoned the idea of trying to report on the fly. However, I did leave with 31 pages of typed notes which I will wheedle down to one woman's guess at what will be of most interest to you and the rest of NARALO. One consequence of the travel and conference schedule was that I came back with a wicked cold. So, it may take me a few days to report back.

Best Regards, Dharma Dailey

On Jul 22, 2013, at 12:15 PM, "Garth Bruen" <gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:

...

Kieren,

Thanks for the comment. Our elections are critical and getting them right is even more important.

As far as reporting goes I would like to draw your attention to this document: http://www.knujon.com/icann_compliance_2012.pdf which shows that ICANN's internal compliance function is essentially non-functional regardless of recently published data by ICANN. This was a follow up to a report sent directly to the CEO ( http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/bruen-to-chehade-22apr13-en.pdf ) which has not been responded to.

ICANN is failing the public At-Large and won't discuss these core concerns, has been completely silent on them. I think you can help by raising your voice to ask about them as well from within our community.

There is a very long report log here:

https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Durban+Meeting+Reports+

...

Workspace which is being constantly updated by At-Large representatives, even remote ones. Working groups regularly give reports on our monthly calls. We'd love to have you come on and give your perspective, let me know.

So, it's not really a question of reporting from At-Large, it's more of a question of why we have to leave our families and travel thousands of miles just to be ignored by ICANN. It's really not that much fun. If the problems could be solved and questions answered, we wouldn't have to go at all.

-Garth

-----Original Message----- From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Kieren McCarthy Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2013 11:09 PM To: na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] VOTE RESULTS: 2013 NARALO Secretary Selection

I wish as much time, energy and effort had gone into informing us about the meeting you were paid as our representatives to attend last week in Durban as has been out into bickering about voting procedures.

Kieren

[from mobile device]

On Jul 21, 2013, at 7:19 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

...

Tom,

I presume that by "incumbent" you mean people in office such as the ALAC members or ALAC Chair (usually it is used referring to the person who is in office but is in a contested election).

I guess our experiences are different. Certainly someone who is part of a current organization is familiar with the others who may be in a contested election. But KNOW is definitely not the same as TRUST and not infrequently KNOW is synonymous with wanting someone new. (And I am not implying anything about the people in the current election).

Alan

At 21/07/2013 02:34 PM, toml@communisphere.com wrote:

...

Alan,

What I am trying to say is that incumbents will better know and trust a known player. Amopholy (sp?), might describe the human response that Option 4 draws upon. There are both good and bad associated with this. Random is life.

Best,

T9m Lowenhaupt

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

---

NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

-- Evan Leibovitch Toronto Canada

Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56

-- Evan Leibovitch Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56

Well, thanks to Evan, I can shorten my report quite a bit. Consider this an addendum to his summary which succinctly covered the nuggets. General Observations. I haven’t been to an ICANN meeting since Mexico City 2009. To the good, it seems that At-Large/ALAC is much more integrated into the policy making process at this point. Praise for ALAC’squality and quantity of contributions came from many quarters at Durban- from other advisory constituencies, board members, and ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé. Another marked difference at this meeting was that in Durban, I got the sense that the domain name industry is feeling a bit cornered. There were repeated references to the fact that domain names are now only one means of users reaching the content and services they seek. That means may be of diminishing import. For example, at a Tech Day talk “Platforms and Policies Promoting a DNS Market in a Developing Country,” Dr. Ben Fuller described the “FaceBook factor” in Namibia. Fully 60% of Internet activity in the country may be attributed FaceBook use on mobile phones among users who “may not even know that they’re using the Internet.” Fadi Chehadé, dared to ask in the opening plenary whether as a result of search and walled gardens the DNS will go away. One response to this concern has been the creation new trade organization for the domain industry: theDNA.org whose purpose will be to promote the use of domains. In a presentation to ALAC, theDNA.org chair Adrian Kinderis told us the purpose of this group to promote “using domain names as the primary tool for users to navigate the industry.” It is their hope to restore “domain names as the default way to navigate the Internet.” Yet clearly they have their work cut out for them. Kinderis himself told us that his own mom is on FaceBook from “the moment she gets on the Internet to the moment she gets off.” http://thedna.org/domainnameindustry.html. Outside of the formal meetings, I heard a lot of speculation of where the expansion of top level domains will lead. What seems definite, is that there are many players in the domain industry ready to exploit the expansion by preying on the fears of registrants who feel compelled to “defensively register” to protect their online identities. On the other hand, there is the possibility that some these new domains will create more trust among the public and value for the public, by, establishing TLDS that distinguishing themselves from the shenanigans of the average top level domain. The thinking being that if you know that a TLD holds its registrants to certain standards/practices/etc. you, the user, will be more inclined towards registrants within that TLD. We were told that several of the new TLDs have gone down this route by voluntarily signing on to additional “public interest commitments” beyond those in the standard contracts with ICANN. (Fadi Chehadé credited ALAC for nudging these PICs into existence.) However, the murmuring consensus seems to be, “time will tell” whether value-in-theory becomes value-in-practice. In the short term, ICANN et al will make money on registrations whether they add value (new businesses and services coming online) or suck value (scared registrants piling on the expense by adding registration after registration.) I was put off especially by one slightly drunk economist at the Gala who gleefully reveled in his rent-seeking ways. In the US, a significant portion of the economy is sole proprietor, self-employed and small business- which is to nearly to say- a significant portion of the population is tied up in high-overhead, low-net businesses where piling on the additional expense and hassle of multiple registrations is a particularly bad outcome. As it happens, this point was literally driven home to me. When I got off the plane from Durban, I drove 5 straight hours to the Endless Mountains in Pennsylvania to join my family on holiday. One thing that struck me: the radio ads for these rural businesses are now pointing listeners to FaceBook pages instead of websites. I think that says everything about the wider world that ICANN is operating in (at least as it applies to North America.) Specific Issues Discussed. Less big picture, but perhaps of note. Holly Raiche (of Australia) and Carleton Samuels (of Jamaica) presented a paper from the WHOIS expert working group which recommends a new third party entity should broker WHOIS information, handle accreditation and verify data. Garth Bruen and Evan Leibovitch were both vocal that before anything new is tried, the processes that are on the books should be implemented. One thing I really liked about the report and Holly and Carleton’s presentation of it was that it defined user in relation to the topic (WHOIS) and mapped out specific use cases for WHOIS. Amen. Very nice. Very much in passing, in the ALAC discussion with the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC), one SSAC member made reference to a report of theirs (I didn’t catch the report name or its status) on DNS attacks which finds that several of their recommendations to reduce DNS attacks “haven’t been implemented widely.” I was certainly curious to learn more about this. Another issue that came up briefly was raised during the Multi-stakeholder Roundtable by Hong Xue of Beijing Normal University. Xue has reviewed “several ICANN programs dealing with trademark infringement” and believes that she sees a recent pattern of extending protection from trademark infringement specific to the domain name itself to other forms of Intellectual Property concerns. She specifically called out language in the new “Public Interest Commitments” (Those same PICs that ALAC/At-Large is getting credit from Fadi for?) According to Xue, RA Specification 11 requires registries to get registrants to sign prohibitions that include piracy, trademark and copyright infringement, and counterfeiting. The language of these prohibitions, she says, goes beyond those in WTO agreements. And if registries don’t get registrants to sign such agreements, their contract with ICANN can be terminated. Xue believes that this sets the stage for registries to be drawn into enforcement on IP issues, and possibly is a gateway for DNS blocking as a tool for handling Intellectual Property disputes. Again, I would like to hear more about this. Another interesting issue that came and went was raised by way of a video-taped speech (available on YouTube) by Karaitiana Taiuru. Accordingy to Taiuru any entity can make a claim for a TLD that represents an indigenous group such as .maori or .zulu. He called for At-Large to create an Indigenous working group to foster a way to make good determinations about who should hold such TLDs. Text of the speech is here: http://www.taiuru.maori.nz/indigenous-issues-with-new-gtlds/ ICANN is revisiting its engagement strategy both online and offline. Meetings with ICANN Staff Chris Mondini, Chris Gift, and Duncan Burns explained the current approach which considers a “continuum of engagement” that reaches beyond those who now attend meetings and currently participate in working groups. Key to reaching the full continuum is another redux of its online engagement. New platforms are being created including ICANN labs which will, as I understand it, be an open platform for each constituency to use a vehicle for engagement and The ICANN Academy (which several At-Large members are involved in shaping) will be both an online learning tool (moodle based) and an offline activity. Both will soon be piloted. http://icannlabs.tumblr.com http://labs.icann.org Upcoming Volunteer / Input Opportunities. These are just what I noted, I’m sure there are quite a few more: There are a myriad of committees rearing up to prepare the for the next worldwide At-Large summit called ATLAS 2. ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé is putting together several small “President’s Strategy Committees” and is looking for input on who should be members of these committees. Cheryl Langdon Orr is running a monthly meeting on Metrics leading up to Buenos Aires. Those interested in metrics who can commit to full participation are invited to join. Those who can’t make a full commit to meet each month are invited to play a watching role.

Having covered far more ICANN meetings than is healthy, here are some useful pointers for producing information: [...] Hope that's helpful. Good luck with the cold.

Considering that Dharma was a one-time replacement and isn't planning to undertake the task again, this advice is ... just a tad late. But even so, we're not funded to meander the halls or "cover" ICANN meetings by collecting gossip. We're not there to observe; we're there to engage and affect change. Most At-Large people have specific roles and places to be through much of ICANN week. Key people of ours are already doing double (or triple) duty in roles as liaisons, leaders and members of At-Large and GNSO working groups (or the EWG or ATRT2). And, for benefit of those not intrepid enough to look at the meeting schedule, ALAC-specific activities demand attendance at policy and engagement sessions all of Sunday, most of Tuesday, and the half of Thursday not taken up by the Public Forum. Monday and Wednesday are the "mingling" days -- though much of Monday is taken up with ceremonies and lectures masquerading as workshops, while Wednesdays are full of working groups and round-tables. It's no wonder that many in At-Large want Friday back on the ICANN schedule, so things aren't so tightly packed. Before Durban some complained that we didn't have many accomplishments to talk about. The reports to date indicate, IMO, quite a few of them in Durban. We did what we were there to do... meet amongst ourselves, along with others who would inform us and work with us to advance our goals (including the Board, GAC, ATRT, SSAC and almost all senior staff), then determine the issues and stances we believed of concern to end users as well as strategy for their advocacy. Meanwhile, Glenn was a recording whirlwind, capturing more of the meeting in sound and video than we have ever been used to. As for not taking it all too seriously, no worries there. By definition, At-Large members tend not to depend upon ICANN activity for our careers or livelihood so we can be -- and often are -- more irreverent than those more heavily invested. (Or maybe you didn't see the Vuvuzela in the public forum?) On the other hand ... it may just be my imagination but I believe At-Large people on the average to be amongst ICANN's lighter drinkers, which means we generally miss the juiciest drunken bar chatter. And because we're nobody's potential customer, we tend not to be invited to the A-list parties. (Or maybe that's just me.) Oh well, we survive nonetheless, and have no problem managing to find other sources of amusement. On one of the A-list party nights I found myself at the 9th Avenue Bistro -- one of Durban's best restaurants -- with exceptionally good conversational company (and none of us even had wine with dinner). Anyway, thanks for the tips. Hopefully they won't be completely forgotten by the time they might be useful again. Frankly, between what Dharma and Glenn and I reported -- added to what others have offered in other regions -- I think we've captured the At-Large PoV of ICANN 47 fairly well. - Evan

We all have different approaches to how gain the most out of ICANN meetings. Obvious to those who were sponsored needed to dedicate their time to mHandatory attendance at the assigned committees or working groups. Please note that the delegates were asked to report their daily activities on the ICANN AT LARGE wiki site. This as in the Toronto event was ignored by the vast majority. Only a few of us took the time to report all the meetings we attended on a daily bases. It's important to share what meetings we attended and our observations. As a NOMCOM committee member this work took priority at the expense of sessions such as Wednesday at 1 30 " What do Journalists Think" and the same time slot NCUC Workshop . It's hard to be at three places at the same time. I offered my video equipment for the NCUC session but due to private interviews I couldn't leave the building. These videos are important for non attendees and a record Whenever possible I attended the ALAC meetings during any breaks or early start times to garner as much information as possile. Note: On Monday night the AFRALO showcase was a nice event with great entertainment including amazing dancers. Each of the speakers at the event was recorded but yet posted. These speeches are ideal for an AFRALO Facebook site. Since it was recorded live no translation of the content. Some of the speeches are in French, majority is in English . Glenn Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn@gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight . On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Thompson, Darlene <DThompson1@gov.nu.ca>wrote:

Keiren,

You make some interesting points, however, Dharma was not there as a reporter. She was there as a representative of At-Large from NARALO. That means that she had no choice but to spend large blocks of her time in At-Large meetings. At-Large paid for her to be there and that is the expectation. If you wish to send a special reporter to a meeting, then you would have to do that on your own dime.

However, many of your points about how to dissect what is important and what is not is very useful.

Thanks,

D

Darlene A. Thompson CAP Administrator N-CAP/Department of Education P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 dthompson@gov.nu.ca ________________________________________ From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [ na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] on behalf of Kieren McCarthy [ kierenmccarthy@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 1:48 PM To: na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Reporting on Durban meeting

Dharma,

Having covered far more ICANN meetings than is healthy, here are some useful pointers for producing information:

* 90 percent of the conference is jaw-jaw. It feels important at the time but on reflection you will discover that the vast majority of the discussions had - the back-and-forth, the debates, the disputes, the little controversies, the forced apologies - is little more than theatre. All of it will be forgotten by the following week and none of it has any useful impact.

* The hard part is knowing when and where the important conversation is happening or will happen. Half the time you can discover this by following Twitter - a sudden flurry of people talking about a particular session. Usually you can catch it by talking to people at lunch or in the bar in the evening. Likewise, if you miss something, don't worry - if it is important, everyone will be talking about it. The more people you ask, the most you can pick out what is really important against what people are currently wound up about.

* Never spend too long in one room. Even if you are there as a specific representative, you will better serve everyone by spending time not in that room. People spend an inordinate amount of time in their rooms either discussing what other people in other rooms think, or building up a huge body of understanding among themselves that is then blown out the water when everyone else goes a different direction.

* Catch people during breaks and just ask them what is on their mind. They'll tell you, and you'll get a very quick sense of what is going on across the meeting.

* Don't take notes during the meeting. You will end up with books and books of material that will never see the light of day. Instead, look for patterns. Jot down issues that seem to either create disagreement or build an excited sense of movement. Then, when there is a break, separate yourself for 5-10 minutes and write up a summary of what you think just happened, with highlights and noting who said something that stuck in your mind. If, on reflection, nothing really stands out, then write "Nothing much" and leave it at that.

When you start to get to the end of the week, you then have a really short and simple guide to the week and all the time you would have wasted in meetings making notes will have freed you up to think about what is actually important. If you need specific quotes (and you rarely do tbh), then there is always the audio or the transcript. If you remember who spoke, search for their name in the transcript. If you really want to hear how they said it, go back and forth between the audio and transcript until you find the relevant part.

* Don't go straight from a meeting to a social occasion. This happens far too frequently at ICANN meetings, mostly because people wrongly believe that a solution will arrive if you just talk it out for a bit longer. When you hit that point where everyone is fatigued - and it's not hard to spot - then just leave and get some fresh air. Seriously. You will miss nothing. Then give yourself 30 mins in a quiet area (your hotel room is often the best bet) and write down your thoughts for that day. If you put it off - especially if you kid yourself that you'll write it up when you're on the plane, or when you're back home - then you'll find it is much harder and takes much longer.

* Keep it brief. It is very easy to get pulled into long conversations happening in front of you in real time - we are, after all, human beings and that is how we have communicated for millions of years. But it is unbelievably boring to read long versions of a conversation. We just don't care when we're not in the room. Accept that and write as briefly as possible. Everyone will thank you for it.

* Be light-hearted. There is a tendency for everyone to take themselves far too seriously during an ICANN meeting. It's an atmosphere that starts feeding off itself and by the end of the week everyone is either in a frenzy or completely exhausted. If you let yourself made the odd joke or quip, or you find the light-hearted part of the day and highlight it, it will make the information much less oppressive and far more palatable. Just remember: literally nothing has ever happened at an ICANN meeting that hasn't be undone if people think about it later and decide they don't like it.

Hope that's helpful. Good luck with the cold.

Kieren

On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Dharma Dailey <dharma.dailey@gmail.com

...

wrote:

...

Hi Kieren,

I haven't forgotten your suggestion before the meeting for communicating back to the NARALO about the meeting. I heartily agree that for those of us who can't regularly attend meetings, it's super helpful to get a birds eye view analysis from our reps on the ground. IMO, that's low hanging fruit on the engagement continuum. Before attending, I imagined that I might send communications on the fly, but the way the schedule is constructed doesn't lend itself to reflection and synthesis. For example, on Sunday we were in meetings for 13 + hours straight. So, I quickly abandoned the idea of trying to report on the fly. However, I did leave with 31 pages of typed notes which I will wheedle down to one woman's guess at what will be of most interest to you and the rest of NARALO. One consequence of the travel and conference schedule was that I came back with a wicked cold. So, it may take me a few days to report back.

Best Regards, Dharma Dailey

On Jul 22, 2013, at 12:15 PM, "Garth Bruen" <gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:

...

Kieren,

Thanks for the comment. Our elections are critical and getting them right is even more important.

As far as reporting goes I would like to draw your attention to this document: http://www.knujon.com/icann_compliance_2012.pdf which shows that ICANN's internal compliance function is essentially non-functional regardless of recently published data by ICANN. This was a follow up to a report sent directly to the CEO (

http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/bruen-to-chehade-22apr13-en.pdf

...

...

) which has not been responded to.

ICANN is failing the public At-Large and won't discuss these core concerns, has been completely silent on them. I think you can help by raising your voice to ask about them as well from within our community.

There is a very long report log here:

https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Durban+Meeting+Reports+

...

...

Workspace which is being constantly updated by At-Large representatives, even remote ones. Working groups regularly give reports on our monthly calls. We'd love to have you come on and give your perspective, let me know.

So, it's not really a question of reporting from At-Large, it's more of a question of why we have to leave our families and travel thousands of miles just to be ignored by ICANN. It's really not that much fun. If the problems could be solved and questions answered, we wouldn't have to go at all.

-Garth

-----Original Message----- From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Kieren McCarthy Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2013 11:09 PM To: na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] VOTE RESULTS: 2013 NARALO Secretary Selection

I wish as much time, energy and effort had gone into informing us about the meeting you were paid as our representatives to attend last week in Durban as has been out into bickering about voting procedures.

Kieren

[from mobile device]

On Jul 21, 2013, at 7:19 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

...

Tom,

I presume that by "incumbent" you mean people in office such as the ALAC members or ALAC Chair (usually it is used referring to the person who is in office but is in a contested election).

I guess our experiences are different. Certainly someone who is part of a current organization is familiar with the others who may be in a contested election. But KNOW is definitely not the same as TRUST and not infrequently KNOW is synonymous with wanting someone new. (And I am not implying anything about the people in the current election).

Alan

At 21/07/2013 02:34 PM, toml@communisphere.com wrote:

...

Alan,

What I am trying to say is that incumbents will better know and trust a known player. Amopholy (sp?), might describe the human response that Option 4 draws upon. There are both good and bad associated with this. Random is life.

Best,

T9m Lowenhaupt

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

---

NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------ ------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------