[governance] ICANN - Request for Proposals for IndependentEvaluator for GNSO Review

Jeanette Hofmann jeanette at wz-berlin.de
Wed Dec 21 11:04:10 EST 2005


Dear Wolfgang,

what makes it an "interesting move" when the board listens carefully to 
its constituencies? It seems you are saying that we are so accustomed to 
a board not listening carefully that it looks like a strategic decision 
  when they once do so :-)

The conclusion that the board takes ALAC more seriously I find rather 
far fetched. I found the proposed change of bylaws regarding the 
accreditation of "ALS" a somewhat pathetic step. If I understand the 
situation correctly, ALAC cannot recall or throw out the members who 
were appointed by the board. If some of them don't participate anymore, 
ALAC lacks the necessary majority for accrediting new ALS.

Instead of pointing out the dubious status and unclear terms of the 
original ALAC members and instead of asking for some autonomy in the 
selection of its members, ALAC chose the smallest change possible and 
asked to modify the requirements for accrediting ALS. The board 
acknowledged this decision. What makes you think that this can be 
interpreted as taking ALAC more seriously?

jeanette


Wolfgang Kleinw├Ąchter wrote:
> Dear list,
>  
> I noticed seven interesting "moves" by ICANN during the recent Vancouver meeting:
>  
> * the board listened carefully to the interventions with regard ot the .com agreement. It did not ignore the criitical remarks but started a new discussion process;
> * the board is seeking a new relationship with the GAC, listening to the advice in a new way, even risking litigation in the US with regard to .xxx case (it is another question wherther this is good or bad);
> * the board is listening to the voice of the ccTLDs. The adopted changes of the bylaws are substantial and reflect the positions of DENIC, NOMINET and others which so far, remained outside the CNSO;
> * the board wants to overcome the frustrating situation with the GNSO. It remains to be seen whether the evaluation will be another attempt to get justification for more of the same or whether it will have some consequences;
> * the board has finally accepted the full authority of the NRO over the IP address space and policy development in this area;
> * the board is trying to bring the IANA service in line with the needs of the registries which would go beyond the former approach  (reduce the waiting time and everything is okay) and include also QOS ;
> * the board takes ALAC more seriously. The adoption of the revised bylaw para with regard to the accreditation of ALS could be interpreted as a signal and it is now up to the ALAC to ask for more.  
>  
> There is also a long list of "missed opportunities" (so far), but ICANN obviously has recognized that after Tunis it is operating in a new environment. David Hendon said in Tunis, ICANN should read the "writings on the wall" and obviously there are literate people in the ICANN board. :-))))
>  
> Best
>  
> wolfgang
>  
>  
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> Von: governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Avri Doria
> Gesendet: Di 20.12.2005 20:38
> An: Carlos Afonso
> Cc: Governance Caucus
> Betreff: Re: [governance] ICANN - Request for Proposals for IndependentEvaluator for GNSO Review
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 20 dec 2005, at 14.29, Carlos Afonso wrote:
> 
> 
>>Maybe a result of just protests like Danny's and others? Interesting.
> 
> 
> if there is one change that i think is taking place in ICANN, is that 
> protests are listened to, especially if they are public.
> 
> a.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance



More information about the Governance mailing list