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