[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Please respond - straw poll on Early Reveal Process for Adjectival Form of Country Names - deadline Tuesday 10 September at 14:00 UTC
Marita Moll
mmoll at ca.inter.net
Tue Sep 10 13:42:48 UTC 2019
Dear all: In this very distributed discussion which takes part on
various platforms (on-line meetings, lists and sometime f2f) and, in
keeping with the multitstakeholder model, includes many people of
varying language proficiencies --be it second language issues, different
cultural backgrounds and ways of engaging, and varying professional
backgrounds (technical/legal,community, etc), I believe a straw poll
like this is entirely appropriate, especially to bring out some of the
voices that are listening but not finding and easy way into this discussion.
Marita
On 9/10/2019 8:36 AM, Alexander Schubert wrote:
>
> Dear Paul,
>
> Please have the courtesy to quote in context. You quote “example
> geo-communities” THREE times when the context was “needs of for
> examplegeo-communities”.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alexander
>
> *From:*McGrady, Paul D. [mailto:PMcGrady at taftlaw.com]
> *Sent:* Dienstag, 10. September 2019 14:58
> *To:* alexander at schubert.berlin; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
> *Subject:* RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Please respond - straw poll on
> Early Reveal Process for Adjectival Form of Country Names - deadline
> Tuesday 10 September at 14:00 UTC
>
> Thanks Alexander.
>
> I’m not sure what fossil fuels have to do with ICANN, and I think it
> attempts to paint those who aren’t for special geo rights (and are for
> free speech rights) as the equivalent of the “evil fossil fuel
> lobbyist” and (of course) paints the extremely small group pushing for
> special protections for geo terms as the heroic “environmentalist” --
> so I won’t respond to that.
>
> As for the second assertion, it sounds like you are disappointed with
> the outcomes of WT5 on the basis that “example geo-communities”
> (whatever those undefined entities may be) were to be accorded
> “especially [special] protect [protections]” for their needs and
> “fundamental rights” (whatever undefined, and to date unidentified,
> fundamental rights those may be). I have seen nothing in ICANN’s
> bylaws that would support the idea that ICANN has an obligation to
> ignore the rest of the multistakeholder community and dole out special
> rights to “example geo-communities.” Can you point me to the section
> in the bylaws that supports your notion that “example geo-communities”
> should be given preferential status in this multistakeholder process?
>
> Best,
>
> Paul
>
> *From:*Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org>> *On Behalf Of
> *Alexander Schubert
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 10, 2019 6:26 AM
> *To:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Please respond - straw poll on
> Early Reveal Process for Adjectival Form of Country Names - deadline
> Tuesday 10 September at 14:00 UTC
>
> Paul,
>
> In my opinion you are conflating constituency participation with
> legitimate interests:
>
> If there was a hearing to protect the environment and you had 99
> fossil fuel lobbyists and one environmentalist: You could always claim
> that “close to 100% of the participants objected the suggested
> protection measures”; even when it only served the fossil fuel
> industry and would create harm for the general public.
>
> ICANN has the mission to expand the DNS in a meaningful way that
> serves the interest of the global Internet Community – and especially
> protects the fundamental rights and needs of for example
> geo-communities. I certainly do not see that reflected in WT5.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alexander
>
> *From:*Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
> [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *McGrady,
> Paul D.
> *Sent:* Dienstag, 10. September 2019 06:01
> *To:* Justine Chew <justine.chew at gmail.com
> <mailto:justine.chew at gmail.com>>; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Please respond - straw poll on
> Early Reveal Process for Adjectival Form of Country Names - deadline
> Tuesday 10 September at 14:00 UTC
>
> Thanks Justine. I appreciate your point of view and your taking the
> time to put it on the list. While you and I may have a different
> perspective on what constitutes a “no consensus” outcome on the calls
> and the list, I do heartily respect the vigor with which you have been
> participating in these discussions and the genteel tone you always
> have in your posts and interventions.
>
> Best,
>
> Paul
>
> *From:*Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org>> *On Behalf Of *Justine
> Chew
> *Sent:* Monday, September 9, 2019 9:41 PM
> *To:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Please respond - straw poll on
> Early Reveal Process for Adjectival Form of Country Names - deadline
> Tuesday 10 September at 14:00 UTC
>
> Paul,
>
> I respectfully disagree with your comment about the answer being "no"
> on both the calls and the list.
>
> It is for the co-leads to decipher the level of support for the
> question at hand (or any question, for that matter) and I think they
> have not been able to do so either way with all of WT5 (beyond the
> folks who have or have not been able to attend the calls) and
> are attempting to do so with this straw poll.
>
> Since WT5 discussions are available to anyone on the list (at least),
> I don't think it's fair to say we are "/now asked again in a vacuum/"
> to express either support or opposition to the proposal whether to
> recommend an Early Reveal Process for Adjectival Form of Country Names
> or not.
>
>
> Regards,
> Justine
> -----
>
> On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 at 04:46, McGrady, Paul D. <PMcGrady at taftlaw.com
> <mailto:PMcGrady at taftlaw.com>> wrote:
>
> Thanks Martin. While I understand the desire to give voice to
> those who did not attend the call, it is important to remember
> that those who would be responding to the straw poll will be doing
> so without the benefit of having attended the calls and having
> heard the very detailed back and forth and the reasons why we got
> to stalemate on the calls (unless, of course they would commit to
> listening to the call recordings in advance of responding to the
> straw poll, but there is no request or mechanism for this within
> the straw poll). As mentioned before, I think excising this one
> item out of its context and asking for folks who may not have the
> benefit of the context to indicate their position is stretching us
> very far down and really calls into question why we have the calls
> in the first place and not simply do all of this by listserv and
> then “straw polls” which are not consensus calls or any other
> mechanism I am aware of under GNSO operating procedure. I’m with
> Robin on this – it just looks like the question is going to keep
> being asked (on the calls – answer “no”) and asked (on the list –
> answer “no”) and now asked again in a vacuum (via a straw poll)
> until the WT finally comes up with the “correct” answer that a
> narrow group want to see here.
>
> Best,
>
> Paul
>
> *From:*Martin Sutton <martin at brandregistrygroup.org
> <mailto:martin at brandregistrygroup.org>>
> *Sent:* Monday, September 9, 2019 3:37 PM
> *To:* McGrady, Paul D. <PMcGrady at taftlaw.com
> <mailto:PMcGrady at taftlaw.com>>; Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org
> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>>; Mike Rodenbaugh
> <mike at rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike at rodenbaugh.com>>
> *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Please respond - straw poll
> on Early Reveal Process for Adjectival Form of Country Names -
> deadline Tuesday 10 September at 14:00 UTC
>
> Dear Paul, Robin and Mike,
>
> On behalf of the WT5 co-leads, I wanted to reiterate the purpose
> of the straw poll in relation to the group's discussion around the
> specific suggestion for adjectival forms.
>
> We have had numerous discussions which helped develop and progress
> a focused proposal which recently appeared to be gaining
> acceptance from different (and often opposing) parts of WT5. We
> note, however, that this was over a number of weeks when the
> participation on the calls varied, particularly over the holiday
> season and last week's call illustrated an array of positions as
> we tried to close off the topic.
>
> As a result, the co-leads decided to conduct a straw-poll to help
> gauge whether there was interest amongst the whole WT5 to pursue
> this any further. This would allow those that had not been able
> to join last week's meeting and other recent calls to have a say,
> as well as others that may not feel comfortable speaking directly
> on the calls.
>
> I appreciate the comments you have included in your emails but
> would ask that you also submit your response via the straw poll,
> if not already done so, so we can determine if there is a
> possibility of the group coming to an agreement to adopt this
> proposal as a recommendation.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Martin Sutton
>
> Olga Cavalli
>
> Annebeth Lange
>
> Javier Rua
>
>
> The contents of this email message and any attachments are
> intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential
> and/or privileged information and may be legally protected from
> disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message
> or their agent, or if this message has been addressed to you in
> error, please immediately alert the sender by reply email and then
> delete this message and any attachments. If you are not the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
> use, dissemination, copying, or storage of this message or its
> attachments is strictly prohibited.
>
> On 9 Sep 2019, at 18:16, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike at rodenbaugh.com
> <mailto:mike at rodenbaugh.com>> wrote:
>
> Agreed.
>
>
> Mike Rodenbaugh
>
> RODENBAUGH LAW
>
> tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087
>
> http://rodenbaugh.law <http://rodenbaugh.law/>
>
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 9:32 AM Robin Gross
> <robin at ipjustice.org <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>> wrote:
>
> Paul has summed up my concerns on this poll as well. Is
> the plan to just keep asking the question until we get a
> different answer? Because that is what it looks like now.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Robin
>
> On Sep 9, 2019, at 6:10 AM, McGrady, Paul D.
> <PMcGrady at taftlaw.com <mailto:PMcGrady at taftlaw.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Co-chairs,
>
> I don’t understand the purpose of this straw poll. It
> was pretty clear on our last call that there was no
> stomach for any further expansion of geo term special
> rights. While I did try find a way forward, there were
> just too many slippery slope tack-ons and too many
> voices, including the USG’s (representing 330 million
> people) indicating no interest. So, what is the
> purpose of the poll? Is it meant to revive the
> conversation? We were told on the call that the
> conversation is closed.
>
> Also, there are no qualifications within the poll. If
> it said “can you accept this proposal and will stop
> pushing for other lists, etc.” and/or “can you accept
> this proposal and agree not tack-on slippery slope
> additions such as extended time for governments to
> object” or that sort of thing, the poll might be
> interesting (assuming we re-open something that was
> declared closed on the list, which I don’t think we
> should be doing).
>
> I don’t think it is fair to excise out one concept
> without closing off all the other wish list ideas
> presented by others. My concern is that the purpose
> of the poll is just to create a new baseline upon
> which all others can then tack-on all the other
> overreaching ideas and wish lists they want.
>
> Best,
>
> Paul
>
> This message may contain information that is
> attorney-client privileged, attorney work product or
> otherwise confidential. If you are not an intended
> recipient, use and disclosure of this message are
> prohibited. If you received this transmission in
> error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and
> delete the message and any attachments.
>
> *From:*Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org>>*On
> Behalf Of*Emily Barabas
> *Sent:*Friday, September 6, 2019 5:06 AM
> *To:*gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
> *Subject:*[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Please respond - straw
> poll on Early Reveal Process for Adjectival Form of
> Country Names - deadline Tuesday 10 September at 14:00 UTC
>
> Sent on behalf of the WT5 Co-Leaders:
>
> Dear Work Track 5 members,
>
> On the call yesterday, we discussed whether it might
> be possible to come to an agreement to make a
> recommendation regarding an Early Reveal Process for
> Adjectival Form of Country Names. To gather input from
> all members, including those who were not able to join
> the call yesterday, the co-leaders would like to hold
> a straw poll to get a sense of the different
> perspectives. Note that this is not a vote and will
> not be treated as such.
>
> Please take a moment to respond
> here:https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/R77ZLQK.*Please
> respond before Tuesday 10 September at 14:00 UTC.*
>
> Note that if the Work Track is able to come to an
> agreement to put forward this recommendation, this is
> the only recommendation Work Track 5 will make on the
> topic of Additional Categories of Terms Not Included
> in the 2012 Applicant Guidebook. If the Work Track is
> not able to come to an agreement to put forward this
> recommendation, the Work Track will not make a
> recommendation on this topic to the full Working Group.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> WT5 Co-Leaders
> Olga Cavalli, Annebeth Lange, Javier Rúa-Jovet, Martin
> Sutton
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
> <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
> _______________________________________________
> 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/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5/attachments/20190910/4013e15c/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
mailing list