<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-ligatures:none;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Folks,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">I’m doing my best NOT to put my “thumb on the scale,” so to speak on this issue as it’s one worthy of thoughtful consideration. Like Evan, I believe we involve ourselves in many issues on which we do not have
a unique (end user specific) perspective to bring to the table. In that case, we are redundant and exhausting what volunteer resources we have without much effect.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Evan and I do NOT always agree on what the core issues for end users are. We agree on DNS Abuse and disagreed on the sale of ORG which I truly believed to be immaterial to individual end users and should have
been more a focus of NPOC. We agree that prices could be higher to good benefit, even in underserved regions though this requires a more careful analysis than anyone has truthfully done.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">As for an At-Large mandate, it’s twofold, the identification and amplification of end user interests as preservation and effacy of the multistakeholder model. Between those two we can talk ourselves into ANY
issue and I, like Evan, think we should always be endeavoring to talk ourselves OUT of a particular issue, leaving only those where we have a unique, end user, perspective to bring to the table. Our value is not that we are smart people but that we are dedicated
to a singular mission.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">In any case, let’s have a fulsome discussion about the future of the At-Large and what we want from it, in Hamburg. I’ve set aside 2 hours for our anniversary which is intended to be 10min of celebration and
1:50 of discussion, breakouts, debate, etc. Evan, I hope you’ll be able to participate.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Jonathan<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div id="mail-editor-reference-message-container">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Evan Leibovitch via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org><br>
<b>Date: </b>Monday, August 28, 2023 at 10:21 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>mike palage.com <mike@palage.com><br>
<b>Cc: </b>CPWG <cpwg@icann.org><br>
<b>Subject: </b>[CPWG] Ready, Fire, Aim<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"tahoma",sans-serif;color:#0B5394">A high-level tangent inspired by the current discussion:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"tahoma",sans-serif;color:#0B5394"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"tahoma",sans-serif;color:#0B5394">A casual reader might look at this thread and come to an observation that there are two separate issues being discussed, that may not have much to do with each
other. The conversation that Mike, Steinar, Olivier and others are having concern details -- contract language, specifics about volumes and dollar amounts and assignment of responsibilities. Meanwhile, I have barged in -- surely unwelcome by some -- to challenge
the very premises upon which ALAC's participation is being conducted.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"tahoma",sans-serif;color:#0B5394">I have done this because, in my observation, ALAC lacks -- and has always lacked -- an overarching set of objectives upon which to base strategy and ultimately
tactics. We engage in the minutiae of contract language (etc) without clarity of what ALAC -- and what the constituency it is mandated to speak for -- wants from the end result of such engagement.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"tahoma",sans-serif;color:#0B5394"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"tahoma",sans-serif;color:#0B5394">Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat -- Sun Tzu
</span></i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"tahoma",sans-serif;color:#0B5394"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"tahoma",sans-serif;color:#0B5394">While I was involved deeply in At-Large I would note that any internal attempt to create a coherent statement of purpose would be invariably torpedoed by people
insisting that we engage in a never-ending attempt to define the "public interest". As a result, all attempts inevitably sank in the bureaucratic mud. Two separate third-party ICANN reviews of At-Large seemed to wholly overlook the lack of overarching purpose
and mandate service while themselves dwelling on the minutiae. It's probably best that we don't depend on outside consultants to define our purpose, but why can't we do it ourselves?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"tahoma",sans-serif;color:#0B5394">WIthout a clear mission, ALAC has weighed in on many issues in which non-registrant end users have no stake at all. Take vertical integration. End-users don't
know and don't care about the domain supply chain. Even domain consumers -- technically outside our remit but closest to end-users in the ICANN food chain -- could hardly care less if they bought their domain from a registrar or directly from a registry. And
yet there we were at the virtual table, as if our constituency has a crucial stake in that topic's outcome. Think of how many parts of the current ALAC agenda fit the same description. Meanwhile, on high-profile issues that WOULD affect end-users, such as
the delegation of .XXX and the attempted private takeover of .ORG, we were silent. Such choices of action and inaction clearly telegraph -- throughout ICANN and the world around us -- a lack of both purpose and focus.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"tahoma",sans-serif;color:#0B5394">This glaring deficiency continues to retard ALAC's agency within the rest of the ICANN community. Over the years I have received many private emails insisting
that ALAC has more respect now than it did in the past and that it is invited to the policy table more often. To me this is tokenism. I'll be more persuaded that At-Large has the respect of ICANN when we get that second Board seat that was recommended and
promised so long ago. Until then, or until a policy we want that is opposed by the domain industry is implemented, I will maintain that ALAC is being pandered to. We are tolerated in working groups so long as we make little line-item corrections and don't
challenge their very premises or the ability of contracted parties to maximize revenue. We have the authority to talk directly to the Board, yet we chase after Public Comment solicitations just like anyone in the world can. We respond to the actions of others,
we never initiate or try to set the agenda. One of the last such initiatives by At-Large, a white paper of which I was a co-author, was received with a smile and summarily binned; not a single response was returned from staff or the community. Maybe the cosmetics
have changed in the last 15 years but the underlying politics certainly have not.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"tahoma",sans-serif;color:#0B5394">While the status quo is obviously sustainable -- so long as ALAC members get funded to pretend they're the UNSC at a cavernous U-shaped table three times a year
and learn how to play the insider games -- it doesn't do anything to serve At-Large's bylaw mandate. The inmates will continue to run the asylum, because the only entity really capable of making them accountable to the world-at-large is just fine with being
tolerated.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"tahoma",sans-serif;color:#0B5394"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"tahoma",sans-serif;color:#0B5394">- Evan<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>