[CPWG] CPWG - ICANN72 participation

[Roberto Gaetano]

I agree with CW - with the caveat that the ESTA problem will only be postponed to ICANN73 in Puerto Rico, although the sanitary situation could be more favourable.

I think that the fact that “Seattle is home to a large (and growing) number of domain name companies” is rather speaking against an in-person meeting, simply because we cannot say that the other stakeholder groups will enjoy an equally favourable situation.

Trying to see the situation from the outside, I would argue that if ICANN is a domain name industry gathering it would make sense to hold an in-person meeting in Seattle, while if ICANN is the place where the multi-stakeholder community meets it would not make sense. My point is that we have sufficient bias during normal times in terms of multi-stakeholder participation that we do not need an additional one where large part of the world outside the highly vaccinated areas (probably just NA and EU) would not be able to attend. And this not to speak about the fact that under these circumstances the presence is likely to be limited to the professionals of the domain name market.

I am curious to see how the situation evolves and what will be the justification for ICANN to decide in one direction or the other, and also keep an eye on the record of in-person participation for different geographical areas and/or stakeholder groups.

Cheers,
Roberto


> On 14.07.2021, at 20:08, mail at christopherwilkinson.eu CW via CPWG <cpwg at icann.org> wrote:
> 
> Good evening:
> 
> Domain Name Wire editor, Andrew Alleman is lobbying for an in-person ICANN72 in Seattle, next October:
> https://domainnamewire.com/2021/07/14/icanns-board-should-go-forward-with-in-person-seattle-meeting/ <https://domainnamewire.com/2021/07/14/icanns-board-should-go-forward-with-in-person-seattle-meeting/>
> May I say that I think this is a rather bad idea. It would be premature visà vis Covid 19 and extremely difficult to obtain balanced participation with present travel funding policies.
> 
> Covid 19 : irrespective of more generalized vaccinations and testing, it is likely that many participants will have to quarantine for several days on arrival and/or on returning home. At present this is typically 10 days for some countries.
> 
> Who knows what the situation will be world-wide in October?
> 
> Balanced participation: Apparently in support of their case, their blurb notes that “Seattle is home to a large (and growing) number of domain name companies”. So be it, but there are also an even larger number of domain name companies which are NOT in Seattle.
> 
> US Visas : most non-US participants will have to get a new ESTA travel permit ; 
> e.g. mine has certainly expired.
> 
> ALAC and CPWG may reach their own conclusions about achieving balanced AC/SO participation in these circumstances. In my view, an in-person ICANN72 dominated by local domain name companies hardly inspires confidence in the light of At Large's declared objectives for the future.
> 
> 
> CW, Xàbia, July 2021
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20210715/817bca55/attachment.html>