<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">On May 25, 2016, at 11:05 AM, Deirdre Williams <<a href="mailto:williams.deirdre@gmail.com" class="">williams.deirdre@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class="">Dear All,<div class="">My reason for concern about the word "community" is that it is a very loaded word - it carries extra connotations of shared interests, agreement, togetherness. I'm not sure how far non first language English speakers would be aware of this. Therefore when I (as a remote participant) heard a female ICANN employee (I'm sorry I've forgotten her name) refer to "the community" in a presentation that was part of the launching of the new gtlds in London (2012) I asked which community she was referring to. She replied "Oh the ICANN community" as if this were perfectly obvious. Perhaps some of you were "there" in the chat and may remember.</div></div></div></blockquote><br class=""></div><div>Deirdre -</div><div><br class=""></div><div>The meaning of the term “community” often varies based on the context in </div><div>which it is used. With respect to ICANN, there are actually several different</div><div>communities, each composed of the parties (of all shapes and sizes) that are</div><div>affected by a specific set of Internet identifiers, aka 'directly affected parties’</div><div>(as noted in the NTIA Intent to Transition Key Internet Domain Name Functions)</div><div><<a href="https://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2014/ntia-announces-intent-transition-key-internet-domain-name-functions" class="">https://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2014/ntia-announces-intent-transition-key-internet-domain-name-functions</a>></div><div><br class=""></div><div>This “affected community” concept is also reflected the accountability principle </div><div>provided in RFC 7500, "Principles for Operation of Internet Assigned Numbers </div><div>Authority (IANA) Registries <<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7500.txt" class="">https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7500.txt</a>> - </div><div>"Accountable: Registry policy development and registry operations need to </div><div> be accountable to the affected community.” It must be possible for any party </div><div>which claims to be affected by an Internet identifier system to speak and be </div><div>heard regarding the merits of various policy and operational decisions in the </div><div>administration of those Internet identifiers. (In the ideal world, we would </div><div>establish a clear process such that Internet identifier registry systems be </div><div>periodically reviewed for their compliance to the principles in RFC7500, </div><div>and (via some framework that provides for empowered and coordinated </div><div>action) that the structures representing the various affected communities </div><div>would be certain to conduct such reviews publicly and routinely.) </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The phrase “ICANN community” is often used to refer to all of those parties that</div><div class="">participate in the various aspects of DNS policy development. It is sometimes </div><div class="">used to mean all those participating in the ICANN processes of any type, e.g. </div><div class="">ICANN overall governance processes. Thus confusion in meaning is inevitable </div><div class="">given that the DNS community is not organized distinctly from ICANN, as opposed</div><div class="">some defect inherent in the term “community”...</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">/John</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Disclaimers: my thoughts alone - do not impinge on the good reputation any </div><div class="">other person or organization by misattribution of these inchoate musings…</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></body></html>