[bc-gnso] Attempt to bridge Board GAC impasse

Marilyn Cade marilynscade at hotmail.com
Fri Apr 8 12:48:14 UTC 2011

In my comments for BC, I noted that ICANN should include the full story about new gTLDs, not only promotion of how to apply. Millions of users will be highly confused by a campaign that only does the latter. They are users, and many do not want to be suppliers. Some do, or will. We need, as BC, to focus now, as well, on what a responsible communication plan would include re content. I  doubt that a two month communications plan is sufficient. I doubt even more that ICANN staff is thinking )et about not "marketing" new gTLDs, but informing... Vast numbers of users of the kind of changes-- including IDNs, and numbers of new ASCII TLDs. 

I would like to volunteer to draft a short statement about how business users see the role and purpose of an educational and informational process, which ICANN now calls "communication" plan. We were among those that called for this activity. I think that as business leaders and users, we should contribute to shaping it. 

It would be inappropriate for ICANN to market new gTLDS,whether ASCII or IDN,  instead, they need an informational and awarenedd message, part of which is how to apply. 

Marilyn Cade, in my individual member capacity
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: "Michael D. Palage" <michael at palage.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 11:49:12 
To: <chris at andalucia.com>; <bc-gnso at icann.org>
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] Attempt to bridge Board GAC impasse

 Speaking individually and not on behalf of all of the co-authors to the
 article, I have no problem extending the initial communication period if
 that could create greater consensus within the community.
 The reason we proposed an initial two month communication period in
 connection with the string submission period is that under the current
 guidebook timeline potential applicants need to be able to pay $185,000 and
 COMPLETE  the entire applications four months after the start of the
 communication period. Under current Early Warning proposal a prospective
 applicant only has to pay $10,000 and answer three questions. Then based
 upon the initial public policy advice of the GAC, prospective applicants
 would be better informed to make a business decision on whether to proceed.
 I would tend to agree that not enough attention has been paid to the
 communication period, but from a triage control standpoint I am trying to
 prioritize those issues where there is an impasse between the GAC and Board
 on the remaining issues, and an Early Warning system appears to be a BIG one
 in my opinion. 
 In your worst case scenario of ICANN receiving ten thousands of
 applications, what do you think is the better scenario. CURRENT APPLICANT
 GUIDEBOOK: ICANN sitting with 1.85 billion in the bank (greater than the GDP
 of a lot of countries) with ten thousand people demanding that their
 applications be timely processed or the proposed EARLY WARNING proposal:
 ICANN sitting with 100 million in the bank recognizing that there is
 interest in over thousands of unique strings. I would submit it would be a
 whole hell of a lot easier to slow down and readjust in the later versus the
 former scenario.
 Thanks for the constructive feedback.
 Best regards,
 -----Original Message-----
 From: owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso at icann.org] On Behalf Of
 Chris Chaplow
 Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 6:30 AM
 To: 'bc - GNSO list'
 Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] Attempt to bridge Board GAC impasse
 Thanks for posting the article which has it merits towards solving a
 difficult problem.
 I notice that it contemplates reducing the four month communication campaign
 to two.
 I think a more hangs on this campaign and we (community) are not paying much
 attention to it. 
 In most parts of the world the gTLD program is unknown - we need to ensure
 the gTLD's are not just open to the enlightened few who attend ICANN
 meetings.  This is the purpose of the communications plan.  In this present
 environment we expect about 500 applications.
 However, with a  successful campaign, and mainstream media running with the
 story.  I think we will see human 'herd mentality'
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_mentality  and tens of thousands of
 The draft communications plan is posted here
 Apologies for being slightly 'off piste' to the thrust of your article and
 all the hard work that has gone into it. Nether the less worth a comment.
 Best regards
 Chris Chaplow
 Managing Director
 Andalucia.com S.L.
 Avenida del Carmen 9
 Ed. Puertosol, Puerto Deportivo
 1ª Planta, Oficina 30
 Estepona, 29680
 Malaga, Spain
 Tel: + (34) 952 897 865
 Fax: + (34) 952 897 874
 E-mail: chris at andalucia.com
 Web: www.andalucia.com <http://www.andalucia.com> 
 Information about Andalucia, Spain.
 -----Mensaje original-----
 De: owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso at icann.org] En nombre de
 Michael D. Palage Enviado el: jueves, 07 de abril de 2011 19:27
 Para: bc-GNSO at icann.org
 Asunto: [bc-gnso] Attempt to bridge Board GAC impasse
 Hello All,
 For those that have been tracking the GAC new gTLD Scorecard one of the
 areas in which there seems to be an impasse is in connection with what the
 GAC has deemed an Early Warning system for those strings that might give
 rise to important public policy considerations. I recently co-authored an
 article attempting to bridge this gap, see
 Any constructive feedback would be welcomed.
 Best regards,

More information about the Bc-gnso mailing list