[CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] [GTLD-WG] New gTLD Applicant Support - improve it, or scrap it?

[Evan Leibovitch]

Hi Sala, long time no talk.

On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 at 04:12, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:


> My challenge is whether a non-registrant end-user interest exists in this
>> either way, and whether ALAC has credibility to pass judgement on the
>> program at all as part  of its bylaw mandate.
>>
>
> Of course, the ALAC has credibility, were'nt you a part of ALAC.
>

Indeed I was, even Vice-Chair for a few years. That's how I got close
enough to understand that there is indeed a challenge of credibility. A
serious one that impairs our voice when we speak on issues that *do* effect
end-users.

If we are asked "upon what do you base you assertion that end users want
XXX policy?", we struggle. In reality the 15 ALAC reps are making judgment
calls regarding what they think end users want, based on really little more
than an educated guess. (the model of ALAC members soliciting RALOs that
then solicit their ALSs on policy issues is rarely in play.) Those who may
oppose our PoV know this, and have a valid point when they challenge the
basis upon which we choose our sides. Often our educated guesses are good
ones but that's still all they are, devoid of real research of what
end-users want/need from ICANN.


> IMO, this is an issue of interest to other ICANN constituencies but the
>> end-user constituency has no stake in how it is resolved.
>>
>
> I disagree. The end user has a stake as was with the Amazon scenario etc.
>

Please elaborate. Exactly what stake does the end-user have?
Do you really think end-users care who owns .amazon? Upon what do you base
this assertion?
When I asked around to people I knew who weren't techies or policy wonks,
there was actually a general sentiment that it didn't matter, and if they
had to choose .amazon should go to the book company and .amazonas should go
to the governments if they really thought it was needed.

I suspect that if we solicited public opinion, globally more people would
find it more useful if the bookstore owned the TLD. Again, what we might
guess with an NGO mindset might conflict with what end-users really want.
So when we stake a position and are challenged, upon what do we base our
PoV? Credibility challenge.



> The question at hand is not "is Applicant support worthwhile" but "do end
>> users care if there is applicant support or not".
>>
>
> Of course they do
>

Evidence? Rationale? Please, tell me exactly why they care. Not "should
they care" but "do they care". I really want to know the reasoning behind
the assertion.


> even if they are not aware, that is where the ALAC has to make a judgment
> call.
>

Again, what is rationale for why ALAC *must* speak up even if its
constituency has no interest in the issue?
Do we speak merely for the sake of speaking?

Noted, but your questioning the credibility of ALAC
>

As Olivier and Maureen and anyone else active in ALAC can attest, the
credibility challenge comes from all over ICANN. I am trying to address it
by imploring ALAC to concentrate its comments on those issues with
demonstrable effect on end users (abuse, confusion, stability, etc)

- Evan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20190807/b9fb6b6f/attachment.html>