[CPWG] [GTLD-WG] [registration-issues-wg] Discussion: End-users definition from At-large perspective

Sat Aug 10 20:00:00 UTC 2019

Thanks to all who did engage in this email thread.

The bylaws is clear of making At-large to be the voice of Individual
non-registrant end-users.

However, I did experienced the challenges that At-large community are
facing while encouraging retired active individual end-user to get engaged
into At-large. Although initially they were curious when they took the
online ICANN learn course for newcomers, but when they started browsing
At-large and ICANN website they got lost and they were honest telling me
that At-large is not of their interested and can't be of contributor in
spite they are experience in corporate governance.

Following Evan's perspective and to solicit input from individual end-user
is not easy. The challenge here is to rewriting the issues for survey
design in a very simplified way to be understood by the layperson.

But still there is a need to activate the role of the RALOs to channel the
voice of Individual end-uses whether they're registrant or not through the
intended planned design when At-large was founded. Because so far, I don't
see this is happening.

I also second Jonathan's thoughts of his last email.

Wishing those observing Al-Adha a Happy Eid.
Best wishes to all,
Nadira

On Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 20:31 Jonathan Zuck <JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org>
wrote:

> Olivier,
> While I agree thus conversation has gone off the rails to some degree, I'm
> sympathetic to Evans initiative to return the ALAC to first principles:
> advocating for the interests of individual end users and, when there's a
> conflict between the interests of registrants and non-registrants, we side
> with the non-registrants. That's really the whole ball of wax.
>
> How we determine those interests is a separate and important question for
> which we are searching for answers, the recent pole being a relevant
> experiment. But we have to STOP relitigating those first principles or we
> will never get our act together. We do, indeed, need to have the discipline
> to let things go that are already being said or are not directly relevant
> to the end user experience around the world.
>
> Just my thoughts.
> Jonathan
>
> Jonathan Zuck
> Executive Director
> Innovators Network Foundation
> www.Innovatorsnetwork.org
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com>
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 10, 2019 4:19:44 AM
> *To:* Evan Leibovitch <evanleibovitch at gmail.com>; Jonathan Zuck <
> JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org>
> *Cc:* CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [CPWG] [GTLD-WG] [registration-issues-wg] Discussion:
> End-users definition from At-large perspective
>
> Dear Evan,
>
> I must admit that I really do not understand what you are trying to
> achieve by huffing and puffing on the CPWG mailing list. You appear to be
> engaged in a venture to question the ALAC's legitimacy in anything it does
> - but this debate was past after the second At-Large review and it's too
> late to keep on going back to the stone age and remember the Wars of
> Religion. As for the ALAC being a laughing stock, if they can do better, I
> invite these people rather than laughing in their armchair, to come in and
> help us draft comments that have an impact, just like the incredibly
> talented people that have done so recently in this Working Group and that
> are spending a considerable amount of time contributing to the ICANN
> multi-stakeholder policy processes.
>
> When it comes to NCUC, NPOC, At-Large, the BC, the IPC and other
> constituencies, there are many people who are active in more than one of
> these constituencies. Unless you are aiming to run a system that is a
> totalitarian regime, I would suggest that you allow that to happen. The
> world is not just black or white, left or right, hot or cold, nice or
> nasty. Let people be free to help where they can and not put them in a
> box/jail.
>
> Now let's please get back to discussing policy rather than whipping
> ourselves into a frenzy.
>
> Kindest regards,
>
> Olivier
>
> On 10/08/2019 03:49, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
>
> On Fri, 9 Aug 2019 at 20:55, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org>
> wrote:
>
>> I think it's not about who we are but what interests we endeavor to
>> represent. The NCUC only concerns themselves with registrants.
>>
>
> That was my original point -- That there is a body already within ICANN
> representing the interests of individual registrants, in theory leaving
> ALAC as the body uniquely positioned to speak for non-registrant end-users.
> That the body charged with representing registrants is remiss in its duty
> should not be ALAC's problem, yet the resulting spillover also causes ALAC
> to be remiss in ITS duty.
>
> The logic should be easy because there are more than 4 billion Internet
> users and about 350 million domains in play total. So even assuming only
> three domains per registrant (and we know that is very far from reality),
> registrants are outnumbered by non-registrants by more than 30 to 1. Yet
> ALAC has a problem because of its high proportion of self-selectred
> Internet experts and insiders, most of whom either own a domain or have
> evaluated the need to have one. Our own makeup is heavily skewed against
> the non-registrant 95% because most in At-Large simply don't share their
> experience. The original theory was that the ALSs were going to be the way
> through which non-registrants would be able to participate in large
> numbers, but that intent has absolutely failed as most ALSs have turned out
> to be self-interested bodies such as ISOC and Internauta chapters or
> tech-focused NGOs. (Isn't that what the Review concluded?) Such
> participation brings people with needed skill and passion, but without the
> perspective of the 95% of the world who will likely never own a domain. And
> without a credible plan for speaking on behalf of the non-registrant 95%,
> ALAC's own credibility is at risk (arguably it's already shot and needs a
> reboot).
>
> A few immediate remedies are possible while things are sorted out:
>
>    - The NomCom is directed to make its ALAC selections non-registrants
>    as at least a token effort at balance.
>    - ALAC outreach needs to find people who are interested in end user
>    issues who have no interest in buying domains.
>    - ALAC itself must commit to understand its issues through a
>    non-registrant lens before choosing to comment on them.
>
> Longer term ALAC needs to engage in public surveys and research to guide
> its actions (and reactions) rather than its own elitist sense of what is
> right for end users. I daresay that the priorities of the billions wrt what
> is needed from ICANN differs widly from ALAC's current guesses.
>
> - Evan
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing listCPWG at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20190810/4acf0b67/attachment-0001.html>