Hi everyone,
resending this email trying to capture and summarise , I may miss some parts, the ongoing discussion to pick-up topics. I think we have this rough list:
- beyond new gTLDs: what next for ICANN naming policy?
We might want to specify more what we’re interested in here, since the history has clearly been that really broadly framed questions invariably lead to a) the Board asking us to be more specific, and/or b) conversations that go everywhere and nowhere.
- why they think ICANN should have a monopoly on IANA functions - why the community should not be able to periodically review their performance and seek bids from alternate providers.
May I suggest simply “do they think…” We’ve been talking in other spaces about trying to dial back on framings that make them feel its an adversarial interrogation rather than a dialogue.
- what the board thinks is, and is not, its fiduciary responsibility and to whom?
- How "public interest commitments" relate to the bottom-up policy development process at ICANN. What are the Board's plans for enforcing these PICs? is e.g. copyright or other IP enforcement part of the plan?
If people really want to hone in on the nasty IPR stuff being slipped in rather tackle than the broad range of issues involved in a PI framing it might be good to say that too.
So we’ve decided not to discuss auctions?
Best
Bill
there was some points Global Public Interest with regard to GNSO made policy but also mention of implementation review role, @Avri do you have wording for that topic?
Any help to tweak and edit those proposals will be helpful. we should be more clear and explain the rationale behind those topics since board members are supposed to prepare few weeks in advance
We can send a short list to the board by the end of this week, while we continue the discussion and share opinions . That will be our preparation for the substantive discussion during the joint-session. With the new format proposed by the ICANN board, we would expect more interactive discussion.
Best,
Rafik