[CCWG-ACCT] Deck for Meeting #75 Mission Statement discussion

Avri Doria avri at acm.org
Wed Jan 20 05:01:39 UTC 2016


Perhaps I am misunderstanding the conversation ongoing on this list, but
this seems more like gTLD policy making than clarifying without changing
the mission.  It is almost as if we want to preclude the freedom of the
GNSO to make bottom up multistakeholder decisions about gTLDs or
community gTLDs that may be decided upon in the future.

We are getting into a very murky issue that is still the subject of
reconsideration, CEP and IRP processes.  In fact more all the time.

I think we are trying to do too much at the last minute with
manipulation of the mission to meet people's political ideas about what
ICANN should and should not do.  My suggestions is that we go back to
the wording for draft 3 and just make the minimal changes needed by the
the IETF and the RIRs and leave discussions about ICANN's mission for
WS2 or elsewhen - this is a long discussion we are embarking on.

Personally I am very committed to the policies that the GNSO initiated
on communities and while I think there is a lot of work to do on them in
the next PDP, I do not think it is work that is appropriate at this
point in time for this process.  We are supposed to be working on
accountability not the mission or the gTLD program.  but if this is
going to become a question about what is acceptable in terms of
communities, their commitments and the contracts they make with ICANN on
behalf of the communities they intend to serve, I will have a whole lot
more to say.  I am currently saving those arguments for the subsequent
gTLD PDP, but if those issues need to be fought here and now, I guess I
am willing.

Is this part of the WS1 task?
If so, why?
I do not think this is part of the requirement for WS1 and transition.


This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list