Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sun, 4 Dec 2016 10:01:21 -0500 |
Content-Type: | multipart/alternative |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Colleagues,
I would like to follow up on the Stephanie/Klaus opening on an agenda
for the Intersession with a suggestion that there be a reflection and
discussion on the potentially poisonous implications of the issues
around the .xxx registry contract renewal.
The core issue is not whether the proposed changes are good or bad. The
core issue is: Does this supersede ICANN’s bottom up multistakeholder
policy making processes? Superseding ICANN’s processes poses a triple
threat: to policy making; to stakeholder collaboration within ICANN; and
to ICANN’s stature as a multistakeholder policy making organization. It
opens the door to ad hoc (board/staff) policy, to strategic lobbying
rather than collaboration, compromise and consensus among
constituencies, and to threats to ICANN’s legitimacy. There should be
enough in there to constitute an agenda item for the intersessional.
I will even go so far as to get myself in trouble by suggesting that
topics in this area are more critical for an intersessional venue than
are the wider ICANN issues of human rights and anti-harassment policies.
Hope I don’t get harassed for exercising my freedom of speech suggesting
that. :-\
Sam L. npoc/csih
|
|
|