Asking for approval of Summit WG3 report (new gTLDs)
Hello all, I'm coming to one of those moments of pure exasperation. At the Summit, I was involved in working group 3 -- new gTLDs. My WG -- like all of them -- worked hard and long hours to craft a consensus that included not only critique but concrete recommendations for progress. The result of this work is at https://st.icann.org/alac-docs/index.cgi?statement_on_new_gtlds_applications... We knew at the time that ICANN had imposed a deadline of April 13 for comments to revision 2 of the gTLD guidebook. I have been desperately asking ALAC for some process in evaluating the work to date, suggesting changes, and submitting the result in time as an endorsed document. To this end, I attended the last ALAC conference call and practically begged for some indication that this was being taken seriously. So far I have heard nothing from anyone except for 1) Un-helpful comments from staff that suggested our credibility was at risk because of unnamed people whose views we hadn't considered. Weeks have passed since this staff threat was issued, yet none of the unnamed has stepped forward. 2) A timetable offered by the ALAC executive, proposing a consultative process that ends one week after the deadline has passed: https://st.icann.org/alac-docs/index.cgi?at_large_policy_development_schedul... I have personally heard from a number of individuals, and I have indicated their concerns in comments at the bottom of the WG3 wiki page indicated above. I am hoping to word-craft some text that will address these concerns. I also recall Beau stating that he had some comments but I haven't heard any details yet. In the meantime, I would like to know if I can ask for NARALO endorsement of the document, in light of ALAC's absence of action (and the breaking of a personal promise by its Chair). At this point I am asking for a tentative endorsement while I word on wording to address the concerns raised in my comments underneath. - Evan
Hi Evan, I haven't read the document yet but have been following the events as you have set them out below. Question: Even if you cannot get ALAC or NARALO support, could you not still submit this document as a Summit WG document? I'm not saying that NARALO wouldn't endorse this, I'm just thinking that if this doesn't happen, you should still be able to submit the document on behalf of a wide cross-section of international groups (WG3). I don't see this as being bad and, in fact, would be yet another concrete example of work the Summit accomplished. Of course, getting NARALO support in addition would be great. D Darlene A. Thompson Community Access Program Administrator Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 E-mail: dthompson@gov.nu.ca -----Original Message----- From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Evan Leibovitch Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 1:32 PM To: NA Discuss Subject: [NA-Discuss] Asking for approval of Summit WG3 report (new gTLDs) Hello all, I'm coming to one of those moments of pure exasperation. At the Summit, I was involved in working group 3 -- new gTLDs. My WG -- like all of them -- worked hard and long hours to craft a consensus that included not only critique but concrete recommendations for progress. The result of this work is at https://st.icann.org/alac-docs/index.cgi?statement_on_new_gtlds_applicat ions_process_v2_al_alac_st_0309_3_en We knew at the time that ICANN had imposed a deadline of April 13 for comments to revision 2 of the gTLD guidebook. I have been desperately asking ALAC for some process in evaluating the work to date, suggesting changes, and submitting the result in time as an endorsed document. To this end, I attended the last ALAC conference call and practically begged for some indication that this was being taken seriously. So far I have heard nothing from anyone except for 1) Un-helpful comments from staff that suggested our credibility was at risk because of unnamed people whose views we hadn't considered. Weeks have passed since this staff threat was issued, yet none of the unnamed has stepped forward. 2) A timetable offered by the ALAC executive, proposing a consultative process that ends one week after the deadline has passed: https://st.icann.org/alac-docs/index.cgi?at_large_policy_development_sch edule I have personally heard from a number of individuals, and I have indicated their concerns in comments at the bottom of the WG3 wiki page indicated above. I am hoping to word-craft some text that will address these concerns. I also recall Beau stating that he had some comments but I haven't heard any details yet. In the meantime, I would like to know if I can ask for NARALO endorsement of the document, in light of ALAC's absence of action (and the breaking of a personal promise by its Chair). At this point I am asking for a tentative endorsement while I word on wording to address the concerns raised in my comments underneath. - Evan ------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists .icann.org Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
Darlene wrote:
Question: Even if you cannot get ALAC or NARALO support, could you not still submit this document as a Summit WG document? Yes, that has always been the fallback position. I hope for more but that is certainly reasonable as a minimum.
I have also asked the other members of the WG to advance the matter at their own RALOs. - Evan
Since this has come up here, I thought I should let you know of the following, just sent to the GTLD-WG list: Since there is a concern that the timeline published has the final vote on the new gTLD statement occurring in the week following the ending of the public comment period, it may be helpful for you to know that we have made enquiries of the relevant staff, and as is often the case it will be possible for the statement to be posted to the public comment period once the vote is concluded. In short: the schedule published will not in any way affect the inclusion of the new gTLD statement in the public comment period. Evan, you'll no doubt recall being notified of these facts on 31st March on the ALAC working list. On 06/04/2009 19:31, "Evan Leibovitch" <evan@telly.org> wrote: Hello all, I'm coming to one of those moments of pure exasperation. At the Summit, I was involved in working group 3 -- new gTLDs. My WG -- like all of them -- worked hard and long hours to craft a consensus that included not only critique but concrete recommendations for progress. The result of this work is at https://st.icann.org/alac-docs/index.cgi?statement_on_new_gtlds_applications... We knew at the time that ICANN had imposed a deadline of April 13 for comments to revision 2 of the gTLD guidebook. I have been desperately asking ALAC for some process in evaluating the work to date, suggesting changes, and submitting the result in time as an endorsed document. To this end, I attended the last ALAC conference call and practically begged for some indication that this was being taken seriously. So far I have heard nothing from anyone except for 1) Un-helpful comments from staff that suggested our credibility was at risk because of unnamed people whose views we hadn't considered. Weeks have passed since this staff threat was issued, yet none of the unnamed has stepped forward. 2) A timetable offered by the ALAC executive, proposing a consultative process that ends one week after the deadline has passed: https://st.icann.org/alac-docs/index.cgi?at_large_policy_development_schedul... I have personally heard from a number of individuals, and I have indicated their concerns in comments at the bottom of the WG3 wiki page indicated above. I am hoping to word-craft some text that will address these concerns. I also recall Beau stating that he had some comments but I haven't heard any details yet. In the meantime, I would like to know if I can ask for NARALO endorsement of the document, in light of ALAC's absence of action (and the breaking of a personal promise by its Chair). At this point I am asking for a tentative endorsement while I word on wording to address the concerns raised in my comments underneath. - Evan ------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica... Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------ -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director for At-Large Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Main Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA DD: +1 (310) 578-8637 Fax: +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 (79) 595 54-68 email: nick.ashton-hart@icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart
participants (3)
-
Evan Leibovitch -
Nick Ashton-Hart -
Thompson, Darlene