[Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposed agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 8 October 2018 at 15:00 UTC

Mon Oct 8 12:02:42 UTC 2018

Hello everyone

http://domainincite.com/23555-icann-blocks-islam-after-government-veto <http://domainincite.com/23555-icann-blocks-islam-after-government-veto>

You can see here the link to the ICANN Board resolutions around three strings….islam, .halal and .persiangulf.

This news is relevant to us all.  The decisions speak to a) any proposed string and objections to it noting that the applicant did everything it could to comply with the application rules, b) the role and utility of GAC advice (even where there is no consensus on that advice and c) evaluation procedures.  Without much improved policy recommendations from the 2012 round we are destined to repeat these expensive (and not only in financial terms) mistakes.  

For me, the final decision to reject the applications six years after the application process closed, speaks to the confidence (or lack of it) we can have in the robustness of community derived policy and its subsequent implementation.   Without wishing to be overly dramatic, this is an existential crisis for all of us who care about the work that we do and the way in which that work is used to expand the domain name space.

Liz

….
Dr Liz Williams | Internet Governance
M: +44 7824 877757 :: +61 436 020 595
W: www.lizwilliams.net
S:  lizwilliams1963

Important Notice
This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.

> On 6 Oct 2018, at 12:34 pm, Jim Prendergast <jim at GALWAYSG.COM> wrote:
> 
> Cheryl and Jeff
>  
> I understand from the last call that it’s your intent to wrap up discussion on the supplemental interim report on Monday’s call and finalize the report soon thereafter.  While that timeline made sense a week ago, I’m not so sure it does now.
>  
> In the last week, there have been three developments that I think warrant further deliberation:
>  
> 1) There has been renewed discussion around contention resolution via auctions (private or ICANN).  And it continues.  It’s brought more voices (new and dormant) into the debate and as a result we have more issues that are being worked into the document.  This is a good thing as we want to present as many options to the community as possible.  The document is better because of that.
> 2) The comment period on the initial report closed and while I haven’t been through all of them yet, I have seen a few instances where the issue of auctions was raised.  For example:
> Some members of the RYSG and the ALAC said the legality of private auctions should be discussed. 
> The ICANN Board said that they had concerns around private auctions and how they can be reconciled with ICANN’s commitments and core values.  I think we need to get more clarity from the Board on that.
> The IPC asked for a study on abuse of private auctions to take place before it could make a full determination
> 3) Related to the last bullet point, as part of our deliberations, there was supposed to be outreach to auction providers to determine if there were additional instances of irregularities.  We haven’t had an update on that recently, but the results of that outreach need to be in this report otherwise it is incomplete.
>  
> We as a group would be remiss if we proceeded to another public comment period without looking at those comments and try to determine how they should be reflected in this document before us.  As many of us know, a lot of time, energy and effort was put into those and for this group to not even consider them in this document would send a terrible message. 
>  
> As you said when asking for liaisons, comments from SGs and ACs hold more weight than individual comments so we should give them such deference. 
>  
> I understand this might lead to delaying releasing the interim till after Barcelona, but the reality is no one outside this group will be looking at it leading into and during the meeting.  There is too much other material to digest prepping for and during the meeting.
>  
> Curious to hear what others think.
>  
> Thanks
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org>On Behalf Of Steve Chan
> Sent: Friday, October 05, 2018 5:42 PM
> To: gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposed agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 8 October 2018 at 15:00 UTC
>  
> Dear WG Members,
>  
> Please find the proposed agenda for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting scheduled for 8 October 2018 at 15:00 UTC, for 90 minutes.
>  
> Agenda review/SOIs
> Supplemental Report: Review of sections 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5 continued
> Planning for ICANN63
> AOB
>     
> For agenda item 2, please find the latest draft, which accepted all red-lined edits made prior to the 2 October meeting (you can find that draft here: https://community.icann.org/x/4QirBQ <https://community.icann.org/x/4QirBQ>). As it was anticipated that changes would be non-trivial, it was believed that accepting red-lines prior to making new proposed edits would improve the readability of this latest draft.
>  
> For Item 3, we will further discuss plans for the sessions scheduled for day 1 of ICANN63, Saturday 20 October (see the published schedule here: https://63.schedule.icann.org/meetings <https://63.schedule.icann.org/meetings>). 
>   
> Those signed up as Members to this PDP WG should have received meeting information from the SOAC Support team. If you did not receive these participation details or if you would like to send your apologies, please contact the SOAC Support team (gnso-secs at icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>).
>  
> Best,
> Steve 2
>  
>  
> Steven Chan
> 
> Policy Director, GNSO Support
>  
> ICANN
> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
> Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
> 
> Mobile: +1.310.339.4410
> Offic
>  
> e Telephone: +1.310.301.5800
> Office Fax: +1.310.823.8649
>  
> Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses <https://learn.icann.org/> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages <http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers>.
>  
> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO <https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO>
> Follow the GNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/ <https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/>
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/ <http://gnso.icann.org/en/>
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20181008/4505c7c2/attachment-0001.html>