[registration-issues-wg] [CPWG] [GTLD-WG] Towards a comment on evolving the multistakeholder model at ICANN

Evan Leibovitch evan at telly.org
Tue May 21 19:46:15 UTC 2019


https://atlarge.icann.org/correspondence/future-challenges-white-paper-17sep12-en.pdf

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GIWLITB63MNZcG769aceEpTZc23UASdKA5ZS3MUx2WI/edit?usp=sharing

On Tue, 21 May 2019 at 14:06, Marita Moll <mmoll at ca.inter.net> wrote:

> If anyone would point me to the two white papers that Evan mentions in his
> message below, it would be a useful addition to our submission to be able
> to reference these.
>
> Marita
> On 5/18/2019 4:37 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
>
> Evan, as much as some people (and I count myself among them) feel that the
> overall ICANN model needs to be changed to address the types of issues you
> list in your bullet points below, that is not what this exercise is about.
>
> As the name implies, this is *evolution* to increase the effectiveness of
> the current model and not a complete reorg. That may make it less than
> useful in the minds of some, but that is what it is.
>
> It is not the only such exercise going on. There is one purely within the
> GNSO which addresses some of these same problems but has the potential for
> worsening some things (including participation of non-GNSO groups/entities
> which some view as impeding the PDP process).
>
> Is this current process sufficient to address the larger problems? No (in
> my mind). But can it provide useful change without increasing the overall
> structural problems? I hope so.
>
> Alan
>
> At 18/05/2019 01:58 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
>
> Hi Marita,
>
> I apologize for not making the call. I am very interested in this topic,
> but even more interested in not having my time wasted.
>
> As has been expressed before, I am extremely skeptical that the status quo
> can be disrupted purely from the inside.  There have been quite a few
> exercises of this kind before, even high profile moves such as the ATRT and
> independence from the US government have been tortuous but led to little
> real change in the way decisions are made. I could even make the case that
> the IANA transition has worsened the status of stakeholders outside the
> compact of domain buyers and domain sellers. What is the assurance (or even
> broad confidence) that the results of any new work would be heeded?  What
> are the consequences to ICANN of yet again ignoring the calls to distribute
> power more broadly or address its many fundamental breeches of public trust?
>
> There are a few key components of ICANN governance that, so long as they
> exist, render all talk of real change aspirational at best.
>
>    - So long as GNSO consensus policy binds the ICANN Board, the rest of
>    us are essentially powerless.
>    - So long as ICANN's revenue comes solely from domain acquisition, it
>    is by definition in a conflict of interest in setting domain policy.
>    - So long as domain sellers sit on both sides of the negotiating table
>    in development of the RAA and other instruments of domain regulation, ICANN
>    cannot be trusted to act impartially.
>    - So long ICANN is accountable to nobody but its core conflicted
>    community, it will successfully resist change. "Empowered" my eye.
>
> ALAC has diligently participated in multiple previous "fix the MSM"
> efforts which have yielded no significant result. Two white papers produced
> by ALAC members were ignored without so much as acknowledgement of their
> existence. In this context, exactly how serious is this latest iteration? A
> new turnover of ALAC members provides fresh hope and maybe even new
> insights, but lack of institutional memory simply indicates new iterations
> of old efforts that have proven to fail. We hit the most solid of walls
> whenever intention tries to turn to execution.
>
> This just feels so much like ICANN is Lucy and ALAC is Charlie Brown.
> Maybe if we try kicking the football again, this time it will work.....
>
> What's different this time?
>
> - Evan
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>
> _______________________________________________
> registration-issues-wg mailing list
> registration-issues-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
> _______________________________________________
> GTLD-WG mailing list
> GTLD-WG at 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



-- 
Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada
@evanleibovitch or @el56
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/registration-issues-wg/attachments/20190521/bebfb400/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg


More information about the registration-issues-wg mailing list