June 2023 - lac-discuss-es

[lac-discuss-en] At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG)
by PolicyCalendar＠icann.org June 16, 2023

June 16, 2023

[[-- Translated text (en -> es) --]] ***Si necesita llamar o necesita disculparse, comuníquese con el personal de At-Large en staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> con tu numero preferido*** Estimados, La próxima llamada del Grupo de trabajo de políticas consolidadas de At-Large (CPWG) está programada para el miércoles 28 de junio de 2023 a las 13:00 UTC durante 90 minutos. Para otros horarios: https://tinyurl.com/yc2tbws8 La agenda (que se actualizará) y los detalles de la convocatoria se pueden encontrar en: https://community.icann.org/x/b5CZDg<https://community.icann.org/x/iICCDg> Zoom Room: https://icann.zoom.us/j/765717566?pwd=UTJCdWRSZVdJNEhOYW02OVBqQVQ1Zz09 / Código de acceso: #CPWG2345* Transcripción en tiempo real (RTT) disponible en (sujeto a disponibilidad): https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN Puente de conferencias ADIGO: EN, ES & FR: 3535 (sujeto a disponibilidad) Número de acceso gratuito (EE. UU. y Canadá): 800 550 6865 Otros números gratuitos: https://www.adigo.com/icann Espacio wiki del Grupo de trabajo sobre políticas consolidadas de At-Large (CPWG): https://community.icann.org/x/jYDpB Si necesita un marcado, comuníquese con el personal de At-Large en: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Gracias. Atentamente, Personal general Personal de políticas de la ICANN en apoyo de la comunidad At-Large Sitio web: atlarge.icann.org<https://atlarge.icann.org/> Facebook: facebook.com/icann<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> en general<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Gorjeo: @<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge> ICANA en general<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>

1 0

[lac-discuss-en] URGENT: Response to NomCom Rebalance
by claireccraig＠gmail.com June 14, 2023

June 14, 2023

[[-- Translated text (en -> es) --]] Queridos miembros Revise la respuesta resumida de Google NomCom <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VUNiCnwsnHo1rl1M9v8LQc0uFwXl5aegUYme9yX…> y concéntrese en la "*Respuesta **resumida*" que representará la La respuesta de LACRALO a la junta de ICANN, así como la presentación a la Cruz RALO. Siéntase libre de sugerir correcciones y enmiendas. Tu respuesta urgente es muy apreciado, ya que nuestros comentarios deben enviarse antes del jueves 15 de junio de 2023 para las discusiones de Cross RALO. Avíseme si puede acceder al documento. claire c craig Secretaría de LACRALO

1 0

Encuentro informal de LAC en ICANN77 en Washington, DC
by Rodrigo Saucedo Linares June 13, 2023

June 13, 2023

Estimados miembros de LACRALO, Esperamos que este correo electrónico les encuentre bien. Nos complace invitar a todos los miembros de la región de LAC que asistirán a ICANN77 en Washington, DC, a un encuentro informal. Este encuentro tiene como objetivo brindar una oportunidad para que todos conecten y fortalezcan nuestros lazos como comunidad. Los detalles del evento son los siguientes: Fecha: jueves 15 de junio Hora: de 9:00 a.m. a 10:00 a.m. Lugar: Sala Archives Esperamos verlos en la Sala Archives durante ICANN77 en Washington, DC. Si tienen alguna pregunta o necesitan más información, no duden en comunicarse. Un cordial saludo, -------------------------- Rodrigo Saucedo rodrigo.saucedo(a)icann.org<mailto:rodrigo.saucedo@icann.org> Sr. Manager Strategic Initiatives, Latin America and the Caribbean ICANN One World, One Internet [id:image001.png@01D356F4.3F3911B0]

1 0

[lac-discuss-en] LAC Informal Get-Together at ICANN77 in Washington, DC!
by rodrigo.saucedo＠icann.org June 13, 2023

June 13, 2023

[[-- Translated text (en -> es) --]] Estimados miembros de LACRALO, Esperamos que este correo electrónico lo encuentre bien. Estamos emocionados de invitar a todos los de la región de LAC que asistirán a la ICANN77 en Washington, DC a una reunión informal. Esta reunión tiene como objetivo brindar una oportunidad para que todos se conecten y fortalezcan nuestros lazos comunitarios. Los detalles del evento son los siguientes: Fecha: jueves 15 de junio Hora: 9:00 a 10:00 Lugar: Sala de Archivos Esperamos verlo en la Sala de Archivos durante la reunión ICANN77 en Washington, DC. Si tiene alguna pregunta o necesita más información, no dude en comunicarse. Un cordial saludo, -------------------------- Rodrigo Saucedo rodrigo.saucedo(a)icann.org<mailto:rodrigo.saucedo@icann.org> Gerente Sr. Iniciativas Estratégicas, América Latina y el Caribe ICANN Un mundo, una Internet [id:imagen001.png@01D356F4.3F3911B0]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-es] [lac-discuss-en] ICANN 77 Policy Session: An end user perspective: The next gTLD application window
by apisan＠unam.mx June 12, 2023

June 12, 2023

[[-- Translated text (en -> es) --]] Bueno, básicamente, resumí que dijiste que no hay motivo para que apoyemos la expansión a nuevos gTLD, pero que vas a impulsarlo. Y pedí divulgación de intereses y le pareció mejor tratar de parecer divertido y evadir la pregunta. Pongámonos serios ahora. LACRALO ha estado luchando con los IDN durante años y no encontró adeptos en la región, sobre todo porque las lenguas indígenas fueron transliteradas a caracteres latinos poco después de que llegaran el español, el inglés, el francés y el holandés. Los criollos y los pidgins se crearon más tarde sobre la base de idiomas fundamentalmente europeos que también se escribieron en caracteres latinos con un mínimo de diacríticos, y ya son compatibles con UNICODE, o nadie ha hecho ese trabajo debido a la falta de interesados y promotores. . ¿Alguien está actuando ante la Universidad de las Indias Occidentales para que sus lingüistas hagan este trabajo y comiencen a experimentar con los IDN para los idiomas locales no coloniales del Caribe y las Antillas? ¿Hay algún gobierno, organización académica, empresa privada (¡pronto tendremos ISP presidiendo LACRALO!) que se preocupe por esto? es posible que lo estén haciendo y los esfuerzos no se hayan comunicado a la comunidad de LACRALO, que estoy seguro aprovecharía la oportunidad de hacer un trabajo decolonial más allá de la palabrería. Con UA no está claro si estamos haciendo una apuesta propia o ajena, en un continente en el que no se desarrollan ni navegadores ni clientes de correo. Entonces, ¿cuál es el interés de la región? Con las rondas anteriores de gTLD, obtuvimos un par de nuevos gTLD asignados con éxito a actores en la región (punto-resto y punto-barra), negocios por cierto, esfuerzos con fines de lucro que se están acumulando para un éxito leve, pero no explosivo. ¿Se tienen en cuenta en la evaluación de la necesidad de seguir adelante? Todos estos puntos se pueden evaluar de forma objetiva, con datos. La carga de la prueba recae sobre los hombros de quienes impulsan esta agenda. Los datos, los datos hablarán, no la retórica sobrecargada que desafía no solo a las herramientas de traducción automática, sino incluso a muchos de los hablantes nativos de inglés. Entonces, ¿alguna afirmación (preferiblemente clara, ya sabes, sujeto-verbo-complemento-claro) en ese sentido? Estas son preguntas bastante claras y, como se dijo, se pueden responder con datos. Alejandro Pisanty ________________________________ De: Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com> Enviado: lunes, 12 de junio de 2023 03:34 p. m. Para: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch CC: Claire C. Craig; LAC Discuss Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-en] ICANN 77 Policy Session: An end user perspective: The next gTLD application window Thank you my friend. I am pleased that you got it.....well, nearly so! We are humbled by your well-known, um, well...humility. CAS ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= On Sun, 11 Jun 2023 at 19:39, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch <apisan(a)unam.mx<mailto:apisan@unam.mx>> wrote: Hi all, it seems that this message may be summarized as: 1. there is no proof that the latest round of new gTLDs, now getting ten years old, did much good; 2. the only reason for final, at large users of the Internet to care about new gTLDs is IDNs, which are only significant for totally non-latin alphabets and character sets (further, we know that in the LAC region there is no important interest nor support for IDNs outside at most three indigenous languages); 3. we never understood what the new-gTLD risk so let's paper over it; 4. those who lobby for new gTLDs are not declaring their interests in the industry; 5. but we must barge on with new gTLDs without further consultation. Mind you, I don't see it as my mission to translate these messages into plain English, but it seems that sometimes a non-native speaker must help because, if the original message is incomprehensible, the automatic translation makes it completely incommunicable to those not bred in the language of the Empire. Hope this is useful particularly for Spanish, Portuguese, French, and Dutch speakers among us. Alejandro Pisanty ________________________________ De: lac-discuss-en <lac-discuss-en-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-en-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>> en nombre de Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com<mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com>> Enviado: domingo, 11 de junio de 2023 04:09 p. m. Para: Claire C. Craig CC: LAC Discuss Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-en] ICANN 77 Policy Session: An end user perspective: The next gTLD application window Dear Claire: Back in 2012 a polyglot group of us in At-Large spent a little time in reflective conversation looking at how we were representing the Internet end user perspective inside in a time when the dynamics of Internet end user growth was in the East and South. Access and cost of access plus use cases were priority concerns for these users. We struggled to fit these into the ICANN policy remit. Everyone of us felt that ICANN's technical coordination role of the Internet identifiers was going pretty well and truly enhancing the stability, reliability and security of the Internet. The high priority interest was to find ways to embrace these new entrants and make them feel welcome enough to find cause to commit to the ICANN agenda and join the community. We thought co-opting them more meaningfully into the governance mechanisms and finding more ways to engage them in their own language and giving them more opportunities to participate in the business of the domain system would be good ways to bind them to the ICANN agenda. We felt that a more holistic view of the Internet governance imperative could be built on a more inclusive and collaborative multi stakeholder model. Those perspectives were positioned as a 'over the horizon' view and outlined in a white paper "Making ICANN Relevant, Responsive and Respected"; labeled the "R3" paper. My survey of the 2023 landscape suggests those challenges are still with us. As a participant on several review teams, GNSO WGs, a few CCWGs and pen holder for several ALAC policy advice to the Board on the high interest matters, my positions come with a long and well documented record of advocacy in the At-Large in general and on the ALAC in particular. I will not abandon nor repudiate those positions. The principal premise of the gTLD round of 2012 was that it was a demand response and required to bring new competition to the domain name marketplace. Then as now, there is scant evidence of that demand. And were we to use the usual economic indicators that frame a competitive market, at least one or more of those deterministic indicators - I like to look at price movement for domain names - are not supporting the stated objective. The task now is to identify the drivers of greater relevance for this next gTLD round to the global community. Here is where the history of the last round suggests some recalibration may be necessary. We still believe that when internet end users see their language groups embedded in the domain name infrastructure, having more skin in the game inures to more respect for the MSM and increased relevance to them of the ICANN remit. This is the gravamen of the At-Large support for IDNs, driven largely by keen engagement of our At-Large colleagues from the East. It is the At-Large's business to be gungho for IDNs in every way it avances that mission. The SubPro WG offered scores of recommendations that would mediate and address some of the ills of the last round as the evidence showed. They were expected to be in place before the next round. Some are adopted but there is still a bit of an argy bargy between contending stakeholders. Continued At-Large engagement must be felt here. Numbers matter. The At-Large and the ALAC championed Applicant Support because we believed more direct investment in the domain name business and system will insure improved engagement and responsiveness of ICANN to those making up the great majority of Internet end users. Notwithstanding significant opposition, we managed to craft a common cause in collaborating with the NCUC. Here I publicly acknowledge the seminal role of my friend Evan Leibovitch in this effort. The evidence was maybe the intervention was too small, too unknown where it mattered most and a little late for the full impact of that policy. Furthermore, it is my view the criteria and process developed for assessment of neediness stifled enthusiasm of would-be beneficiaries. Even as we ensure the fitness of this [anticipated] round's version of the Applicant Guidebook, the At-Large must advocate for a more applicant-friendly criteria and transparent eligibility process. The centrality of the definition of "community" to the community application process must not be underestimated. Similarly with community applications, it is in the At-Large's interest to show and be heard in all efforts to fully embrace those deemed community applications in the anticipated round. If you think about it at a philosophical level and consider how a value bestowed by ICANN on a string delegated to an entity results in satisfied end user interests, alchemy comes to mind. I can see a case for a closed generic gTLD instantiating improved DNS security and downstream business benefits to end users even as I'm ambivalent on what closed generics could mean to the other stakeholders in the DNS business overall. I have been watching with some interest the "Facilitated Dialogue" between the parties - ALAC, GNSO, GAC - on the subject. Although the caveat is presented that the views are individual and not to be relegated to the originating stakeholder grouping, I would encourage the ALAC to take a benign view and not offer any resistance to closed generics, protocols observed. For even if it is only the prospect of an altruistic business model, closed generics should be allowed on principle. The use case horse for strings has already bolted. A denial could conceivably lead to a claim for equal protection. The premise of a more competitive market for domain names with a new round is fraught. But my view is that giving all of them room to breathe and letting them bloom - or not! - is the best posture for the At-Large. The case for domain name expansion as an existential threat to the stability and security of the internet or degrading to end user interests is not made. Carlton Samuels ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= On Fri, 9 Jun 2023 at 07:55, Claire C. Craig <claireccraig(a)gmail.com<mailto:claireccraig@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear All We have been asked to consult with the LACRALO Community to provide input for the following: At ICANN77, the ALAC is hosting a community session on the end user perspective ahead of the next gTLD application window on Monday, 12 June, 13:45 - 15:00. The session will be a round table discussion of the five ICANN RALOs on the new gTLD program. Focusing on topics such as: * Applicant Support * IDNs/UA * Community applications * Promoting the new round * Experiences from the previous round * RALOs expectations and needs of the next gTLDs rounds The role of the RALOs during this session is to provide input from Internet end users on the next gTLD round. The session will help us facilitate communications to prospective and possible applicants with general focus on end users needs and interests. Claire C. Craig LACRALO Secretarit _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-es] [lac-discuss-en] ICANN 77 Policy Session: An end user perspective: The next gTLD application window
by carlton.samuels＠gmail.com June 12, 2023

June 12, 2023

[[-- Translated text (en -> es) --]] Gracias mi amigo. Me alegro de que lo hayas conseguido... bueno, ¡casi así! Nos sentimos honrados por su bien conocida, um, bueno... humildad. CAS ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Móvil: 876-818-1799Estrategia, proceso, gobernanza, evaluación y respuesta* ============================= El dom 11 jun 2023 a las 19:39, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch<apisan(a)unam.mx> escribió: > Hi all, > > > it seems that this message may be summarized as: > > > > 1. there is no proof that the latest round of new gTLDs, now getting > ten years old, did much good; > 2. the only reason for final, at large users of the Internet to care > about new gTLDs is IDNs, which are only significant for totally non-latin > alphabets and character sets (further, we know that in the LAC region there > is no important interest nor support for IDNs outside at most three > indigenous languages); > 3. we never understood what the new-gTLD risk so let's paper over it; > 4. those who lobby for new gTLDs are not declaring their interests in > the industry; > 5. but we must barge on with new gTLDs without further consultation. > > > Mind you, I don't see it as my mission to translate these messages into > plain English, but it seems that sometimes a non-native speaker must help > because, if the original message is incomprehensible, the automatic > translation makes it completely incommunicable to those not bred in the > language of the Empire. Hope this is useful particularly for Spanish, > Portuguese, French, and Dutch speakers among us. > > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > ------------------------------ > *De:* lac-discuss-en <lac-discuss-en-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> en > nombre de Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com> > *Enviado:* domingo, 11 de junio de 2023 04:09 p. m. > *Para:* Claire C. Craig > *CC:* LAC Discuss > *Asunto:* Re: [lac-discuss-en] ICANN 77 Policy Session: An end user > perspective: The next gTLD application window > > Dear Claire: > Back in 2012 a polyglot group of us in At-Large spent a little time in > reflective conversation looking at how we were representing the Internet > end user perspective inside in a time when the dynamics of Internet end > user growth was in the East and South. Access and cost of access plus use > cases were priority concerns for these users. We struggled to fit these > into the ICANN policy remit. > > Everyone of us felt that ICANN's technical coordination role of the > Internet identifiers was going pretty well and truly enhancing the > stability, reliability and security of the Internet. The high priority > interest was to find ways to embrace these new entrants and make them feel > welcome enough to find cause to commit to the ICANN agenda and join the > community. > > We thought co-opting them more meaningfully into the governance mechanisms > and finding more ways to engage them in their own language and giving them > more opportunities to participate in the business of the domain system > would be good ways to bind them to the ICANN agenda. > > We felt that a more holistic view of the Internet governance imperative > could be built on a more inclusive and collaborative multi > stakeholder model. Those perspectives were positioned as a 'over the > horizon' view and outlined in a white paper "*Making ICANN Relevant, > Responsive and Respected*"; labeled the "R3" paper. My survey of the 2023 > landscape suggests those challenges are still with us. > > As a participant on several review teams, GNSO WGs, a few CCWGs and pen > holder for several ALAC policy advice to the Board on the high interest > matters, my positions come with a long and well documented record of > advocacy in the At-Large in general and on the ALAC in particular. I will > not abandon nor repudiate those positions. > > The principal premise of the gTLD round of 2012 was that it was a demand > response and required to bring new competition to the domain name > marketplace. Then as now, there is scant evidence of that demand. And > were we to use the usual economic indicators that frame a competitive > market, at least one or more of those deterministic indicators - I like to > look at price movement for domain names - are not supporting the stated > objective. The task now is to identify the drivers of greater relevance > for this next gTLD round to the global community. Here is where the history > of the last round suggests some recalibration may be necessary. > > We still believe that when internet end users see their language groups > embedded in the domain name infrastructure, having more skin in the game > inures to more respect for the MSM and increased relevance to them of the > ICANN remit. This is the gravamen of the At-Large support for IDNs, driven > largely by keen engagement of our At-Large colleagues from the East. It is > the At-Large's business to be gungho for IDNs in every way it avances that > mission. > > The SubPro WG offered scores of recommendations that would mediate and > address some of the ills of the last round as the evidence showed. They > were expected to be in place before the next round. Some are adopted but > there is still a bit of an argy bargy between contending stakeholders. > Continued At-Large engagement must be felt here. > > Numbers matter. The At-Large and the ALAC championed Applicant Support > because we believed more direct investment in the domain name business and > system will insure improved engagement and responsiveness of ICANN to those > making up the great majority of Internet end users. Notwithstanding > significant opposition, we managed to craft a common cause in collaborating > with the NCUC. Here I publicly acknowledge the seminal role of my friend > Evan Leibovitch in this effort. The evidence was maybe the intervention was > too small, too unknown where it mattered most and a little late for the > full impact of that policy. Furthermore, it is my view the criteria and > process developed for assessment of neediness stifled enthusiasm of > would-be beneficiaries. Even as we ensure the fitness of this > [anticipated] round's version of the Applicant Guidebook, the At-Large must > advocate for a more applicant-friendly criteria and transparent eligibility > process. > > The centrality of the definition of "community" to the community > application process must not be underestimated. Similarly with community > applications, it is in the At-Large's interest to show and be heard in all > efforts to fully embrace those deemed community applications in the > anticipated round. > > If you think about it at a philosophical level and consider how a value > bestowed by ICANN on a string delegated to an entity results in satisfied > end user interests, alchemy comes to mind. I can see a case for a closed > generic gTLD instantiating improved DNS security and downstream business > benefits to end users even as I'm ambivalent on what closed generics could > mean to the other stakeholders in the DNS business overall. > > I have been watching with some interest the "Facilitated Dialogue" between > the parties - ALAC, GNSO, GAC - on the subject. Although the caveat is > presented that the views are individual and not to be relegated to the > originating stakeholder grouping, I would encourage the ALAC to take a > benign view and not offer any resistance to closed generics, protocols > observed. For even if it is only the prospect of an altruistic business > model, closed generics should be allowed on principle. The use case horse > for strings has already bolted. A denial could conceivably lead to a claim > for equal protection. > > The premise of a more competitive market for domain names with a new round > is fraught. But my view is that giving all of them room to breathe and > letting them bloom - or not! - is the best posture for the At-Large. > > The case for domain name expansion as an existential threat to the > stability and security of the internet or degrading to end user interests > is not made. > > Carlton Samuels > > ============================== > *Carlton A Samuels* > > *Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & > Turnaround* > ============================= > > > On Fri, 9 Jun 2023 at 07:55, Claire C. Craig <claireccraig(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Dear All >> We have been asked to consult with the LACRALO Community to provide input >> for the following: At ICANN77, the ALAC is hosting a community session >> on the end user perspective ahead of the next gTLD application window on Monday, >> 12 June, 13:45 - 15:00. The session will be a round table discussion of >> the five ICANN RALOs on the new gTLD program. Focusing on topics such as: >> >> - Applicant Support >> - IDNs/UA >> - Community applications >> - Promoting the new round >> - Experiences from the previous round >> - RALOs expectations and needs of the next gTLDs rounds >> >> *The role of the RALOs during this session is to provide input from >> Internet end users on the next gTLD round*. The session will help us >> facilitate communications to prospective and possible applicants with >> general focus on end users needs and interests. >> >> Claire C. Craig >> LACRALO Secretarit >> _______________________________________________ >> lac-discuss-en mailing list >> lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en >> >> _______________________________________________ >> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your >> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance >> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and >> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You >> can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or >> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or >> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. > >

1 0

Becas - South School on Internet Governance 2023 - Campina Grande - Estado de Paraíba - Brasil
by Adrian Carballo June 12, 2023

June 12, 2023

Estimadas, estimados miembros de LACRALO, Los invitamos a participar de la 15ta edición consecutiva de la @SSIGLAC <https://twitter.com/SSIGLAC> junto a @ANID_Brasil <https://twitter.com/ANID_Brasil> y la @uepbonline <https://twitter.com/uepbonline> Pueden aplicar hasta el 15 de junio 2023 inclusive. Las becas incluyen acceso a una diplomatura universitaria en "Gobernanza y Regulación de Internet" para quienes aprueben las tres etapas de capacitación e investigación de la South School on Internet Governance 2023. Solicita una beca ingresando a https:// https://www.gobernanzainternet.org/ssig2023/ <https://t.co/BVsnYArzvO> - Curso virtual julio-agosto - Curso presencial/híbrido Campina Grande, Paraíba, Brasil 11 al 15 setiembre - Diplomatura Universitaria @fundacincluirme @LACRALO_Icann #gobernanzainternet <https://twitter.com/hashtag/gobernanzainternet?src=hashtag_click> #ssiglac2023 <https://twitter.com/hashtag/ssiglac2023?src=hashtag_click> #internet <https://twitter.com/hashtag/internet?src=hashtag_click> Saludos cordiales. Adrian Carballo Presidente Fundación Incluirme LACRALO Chair Capacity Building WG ICANN

3 2

Re: [lac-discuss-es] [lac-discuss-en] Becas - South School on Internet Governance 2023 - Campina Grande - Estado de Paraíba - Brasil
by claireccraig＠gmail.com June 12, 2023

June 12, 2023

[[-- Translated text (en -> es) --]] Gracias por compartir Adrián. CCC Enviado desde mi iPhone > On 12 Jun 2023, at 8:25 AM, oscar.giudice(a)gmail.com wrote: > > [[-- Translated text (es -> en) --]] > > Thanks Adrian > > Greetings > > Oscar F Giudice > +598 98 324-744 > +549 11 6205-3166 > > > > > > >> On 9 Jun 2023, at 09:44, Adrian Carballo <ainfodata(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Estimadas, estimados miembros de LACRALO, >> Los invitamos a participar de la 15ta edición consecutiva de la @SSIGLAC <https://twitter.com/SSIGLAC> junto a @ANID_Brasil <https://twitter.com/ANID_Brasil> y la @uepbonline <https://twitter.com/uepbonline> >> Pueden aplicar hasta el 15 de junio 2023 inclusive. Las becas incluyen acceso a una diplomatura universitaria en "Gobernanza y Regulación de Internet" para quienes aprueben las tres etapas de capacitación e investigación de la South School on Internet Governance 2023. >> Solicita una beca ingresando a https://https://www.gobernanzainternet.org/ssig2023/ <https://t.co/BVsnYArzvO> >> - Curso virtual julio-agosto >> - Curso presencial/híbrido Campina Grande, Paraíba, Brasil 11 al 15 setiembre >> - Diplomatura Universitaria >> @fundacincluirme @LACRALO_Icann <> >> #gobernanzainternet <https://twitter.com/hashtag/gobernanzainternet?src=hashtag_click> #ssiglac2023 <https://twitter.com/hashtag/ssiglac2023?src=hashtag_click> #internet <https://twitter.com/hashtag/internet?src=hashtag_click> >> >> Saludos cordiales. >> Adrian Carballo >> Presidente >> Fundación Incluirme >> >> LACRALO >> Chair Capacity Building WG >> ICANN >> >> >> <SSIG Becas ES.jpg><SSIG Fellowship EN.jpg>_______________________________________________ >> lac-discuss-es mailing list >> lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es >> >> http://www.lacralo.org >> _______________________________________________ >> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. > > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-en mailing list > lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en > > _______________________________________________ > By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en lista de correo lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en _______________________________________________ Al enviar sus datos personales, acepta el procesamiento de sus datos personales con el fin de suscribirse a esta lista de correo de acuerdo con la Política de privacidad de ICANN (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) y los Términos de servicio del sitio web. (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) Puede visitar el enlace Mailman anterior para cambiar el estado o la configuración de su membresía, incluida la cancelación de la suscripción, la configuración de la entrega de estilo de resumen o la desactivación de la entrega por completo (por ejemplo, para unas vacaciones), etc.

2 1

Re: [lac-discuss-es] [lac-discuss-en] LAC Strategy for Outreach and Engagement
by claireccraig＠gmail.com June 12, 2023

June 12, 2023

[[-- Translated text (en -> es) --]] Hola a todos Gracias por tus comentarios. Es una lástima que la sugerencia llegó después de la fecha límite. Como tal, la estrategia actualizada ha sido enviada al personal como se indica. No obstante, el tema de convocar a un grupo pequeño se presentará para su discusión en nuestra reunión mensual y la estrategia puede seguir modificándose. Al hacerlo, tendremos un documento en su lugar, pero también podemos actualizar el documento para reflejar las enmiendas sugeridas. CCC > On 12 Jun 2023, at 8:25 AM, hannah.ffrank(a)gmail.com wrote: > > [[-- Translated text (es -> en) --]] > > Dear Community, good morning. > > I consider Laura's proposal about creating a group of > work as soon as possible with the pertinent consensus prior to the purposes of its > creation and conformation. > Likewise, I consider that all this is in line with and disrupts what > discussed at the last meeting of the LAC Strategy Council as well as > their respective document LAC Strategic Plan 2021-2025 open to comments > , council of which I am part. > > Kind regards > Ab. Hannah Frank > > >> On Thu, Jun 8 2023 3:12 pm, lilian ivette de luque bruges < >> lilidebru(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> Estimada región, >> >> La propuesta de Laura de crear un grupo de trabajo de outreach and >> engagement en nuestra región me parece muy positiva y necesaria. En cuanto >> a la propuesta de Alejandro me parece muy pertinente, pero como dice >> Alberto hay que hacer el respectivo proceso de consenso. >> >> Saludos >> >> Lilian >> >> El 8 jun 2023 12:25, Alberto Soto Roldan <alberto(a)soto.net.ar> escribió: >> >> Estimada Vanda y Alex, muchas gracias, aunque me hubiera gustado ser >> consultado previamente. Pero el liderazgo de LACRALO aún no ha opinado >> sobre esta propuesta. >> Saludos cordiales >> >> Alberto >> >> -----Mensaje original----- >> De: lac-discuss-es <lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> En >> nombre de vanda(a)scartezini.org >> Enviado el: jueves, 8 de junio de 2023 12:10 >> Para: lac-discuss-es(a)icann.org >> Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-es] [lac-discuss-en] LAC Strategy for Outreach >> and Engagement >> >> [[-- Translated text (en -> es) --]] >> >> querido Alberto >> Felicitaciones. Estoy con Alex aquí. Ha estado tan dedicado a LACRALO >> durante años, creo que sin duda es la mejor opción para este puesto. >> ¡Cuenta conmigo como siempre! >> besos >> Vanda >> >> De: lac-discuss-es<lac-discuss-en-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> en >> representación del Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch<apisan(a)unam.mx> >> Fecha: jueves, 8 de junio de 2023 00:27 >> Para: Laura Margolis<margolisl(a)gmail.com> , Claire Craig< >> claireccraig(a)gmail.com> >> Cc: LAC-Discutir-es<lac-discuss-en(a)icann.org> , Augusto Ho<aho(a)usma.ac.pa> >> Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Estrategia de LAC para la divulgación y la >> participación >> >> Hola, >> >> Dado que el plan revisado no incorporó la técnica de planificación y solo >> absorbió algunas acciones relacionadas con "desacreditar" (creo que debería >> desacreditar) a las ALS, la moción de Laura parece digna de consideración. >> >> Propongo que Alberto Soto sea designado Convocante de un Grupo de Trabajo >> Permanente sobre Planificación y reciba todo el apoyo posible de la >> comunidad. Su experiencia profesional comprobada durante décadas y sus >> contribuciones anteriores a la planificación de LACRALO son una sólida >> garantía de que, si se respalda adecuadamente, este trabajo puede producir >> buenos resultados. >> >> No lo he consultado antes de hacer esta propuesta. >> >> Alejandro Pisanty >> ________________________________ >> >> De: lac-discuss-en <lac-discuss-en-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> en >> nombre de Laura Margolis <margolisl(a)gmail.com> >> Enviado: miércoles, 7 de junio de 2023 07:34 p. m. >> Para: Claire Craig >> CC: LAC-Discuss-en; Augusto Ho >> Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-en] LAC Strategy for Outreach and Engagement >> >> Dear Claire, >> >> Thank you for your hard work. >> >> I think we should create a group to work on this topic, as a region. >> >> See you soon in DC. >> >> Best, >> >> Laura Margolis >> >> El mié, 7 jun 2023 a las 21:06, Claire Craig (<claireccraig(a)gmail.com >> <mailto:claireccraig@gmail.com>>) escribió: >> Dear All >> Having received no further input at 23:00 UTC today, the attached LACRALO >> Outreach and Engagement 2023 (FY23/FY24) Plan is considered final. >> >> By copy of this email, the plan is sent to ICANN GSE staff for approval. >> >> Please be guided accordingly. >> >> Claire C. Craig >> LACRALO Secretariat >> >> On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 at 13:50, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com >> <mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com>> wrote: >> I offer some further clarity and context to Dev's information. >> >> Some of the territories named by Dev are still in colonial ties to Europe >> and usually counted as political entities of the metropolitan power; count >> the Dutch territories of Bonaire, St. Eustatius and Saba and St. Maarten >> and the French territories of Saint Martin and Saint Barthelemy. Any ALS >> developed would likely be EURALO-affiliated but may decide - as is the case >> with Martinique - to caucus with LACRALO. We in the Caribbean actively >> encourage such associations. >> >> We have exploited connections to the telco and tertiary education sectors >> plus regulators to advance the ICANN agenda across CARICOM. The Caribbean >> Internet Governance Forum (CIGF) has been a principal vehicle for enabling >> these connections. CROPP outreach to Suriname has resulted in an ISOC >> chapter but not an ALS to date. >> >> Outreach to the Bahamas, Dominica and Belize has resulted in active >> participation in the ccNSO; we know the individuals and they caucus with >> the Caribbean-in-ICANN grouping. Following the Caribbean engagement model, >> it is likely any ALS developed in those jurisdictions will have to be >> booted by folks from government, academia and the telecoms sectors that are >> already engaged and knowledgeable about ICANN. >> >> We have gone to Guatemala City's Francisco Marroquin University - as part >> of a [Microsoft] Partners in Learning initiative - but used the opportunity >> to promote the ICANN agenda to the ICT leadership there. If memory serves >> there was a successful fellowship application from there. I'm less aware of >> what has transpired since then. >> >> Carlton Samuels >> >> ============================== >> Carlton A Samuels >> Mobile: 876-818-1799 >> Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround >> ============================= >> >> On Mon, 5 Jun 2023 at 10:53, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee(a)gmail.com >> <mailto:devtee@gmail.com>> wrote: >> Dear Claire, >> >> According to the ICANN Stakeholder Tool (https://bitly.com/ICANNST) >> there are 12 countries in the LAC region that do not have At-Large >> Structures. These are : >> >> Antigua and Barbuda (.ag) >> Bahamas (.bs) >> Belize (.bz) >> Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba (.bq) >> The Commonwealth of Dominica (.dm) >> Grenada (.gd) >> Guatemala (.gt) >> Saint Barthélemy (.bl) >> Saint Kitts and Nevis (.kn) >> Saint Martin (French part) (.mf) >> Sint Maarten (Dutch part) (.sx) >> Republic of Suriname (.sr) >> >> Outreach should therefore be targeted to get suitable organisations in >> these 12 countries to join At-Large. >> >> Initiatives such as Community Regional Outreach Program (CROP) could be >> used for such outreach. >> However, the proposed CROP strategy in the draft document says "1. >> Whenever a new outreach opportunity becomes available, the LACRALO >> leadership will send an email to the community, informing them about the >> opportunity, and inviting members to apply to the CROP. >> 2. All LACRALO members are eligible to apply for the CROP program. >> 3. To apply for a CROP opportunity, members should follow the application >> process: >> https://community.icann.org/display/soacabout/Community+Regional+Outreach+P… >> 4, If there are more than two LACRALO members applying for the same CROP >> opportunity, the LACRALO leadership will invite the community to vote on >> the selection of the candidate who will be granted the CROP slot" >> >> This proposed strategy can unnecessarily create delays in filing a >> successful CROP application to an outreach event given the need to submit >> and get approved a CROP application 6-8 weeks before the outreach event. >> >> Given that LACRALO leadership will advertise a CROP opportunity, the >> LACRALO leadership should first reach out to ALS members that are in the >> subregion of the CROP outreach event to attend. Only if persons from the >> subregion are not able to attend, then it goes out to the wider LACRALO. >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> Dev Anand Teelucksingh >> Trinidad and Tobago Computer Society at https://ttcs.tt >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 1:33 PM Claire Craig <claireccraig(a)gmail.com >> <mailto:claireccraig@gmail.com>> wrote: >> Dear All >> Please see attached the LACRALO Outreach and Engagement Plan which was >> discussed at the last LACRALO Monthly Call. >> >> Please provide your comments by Wednesday 7 June, 2023 so that it can be >> approved for FY 24. If not comments are received, the plan would be >> considered as final and forwarded to the ICANN org staff, >> >> I look forward to your feedback as soon as possible. >> >> Claire C. Craig >> LACRALO Secretariat >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lac-discuss-en mailing list >> lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto: >> lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en >> >> _______________________________________________ >> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your >> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance >> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and >> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can >> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or >> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or >> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. >> _______________________________________________ >> lac-discuss-en mailing list >> lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto: >> lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en >> >> _______________________________________________ >> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your >> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance >> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and >> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can >> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or >> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or >> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. >> _______________________________________________ >> lac-discuss-en mailing list >> lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto: >> lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en >> >> _______________________________________________ >> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your >> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance >> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and >> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can >> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or >> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or >> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. >> >> -- >> Laura Margolis >> >> margolisl(a)gmail.com<mailto:margolisl@gmail.com> >> Office: ++598 27066044 >> Mobile / Whatsapp ++598 99690992 >> skype: lauri.margolis >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lac-discuss-es mailing list >> lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es >> >> http://www.lacralo.org >> _______________________________________________ >> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your >> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance >> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and >> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can >> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or >> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or >> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lac-discuss-es mailing list >> lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es >> >> http://www.lacralo.org >> _______________________________________________ >> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your >> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance >> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and >> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can >> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or >> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or >> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lac-discuss-es mailing list >> lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es >> >> http://www.lacralo.org >> _______________________________________________ >> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your >> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance >> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and >> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can >> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or >> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or >> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-en mailing list > lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en > > _______________________________________________ > By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en lista de correo lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en _______________________________________________ Al enviar sus datos personales, acepta el procesamiento de sus datos personales con el fin de suscribirse a esta lista de correo de acuerdo con la Política de privacidad de ICANN (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) y los Términos de servicio del sitio web. (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) Puede visitar el enlace Mailman anterior para cambiar el estado o la configuración de su membresía, incluida la cancelación de la suscripción, la configuración de la entrega de estilo de resumen o la desactivación de la entrega por completo (por ejemplo, para unas vacaciones), etc.

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-es] [lac-discuss-en] ICANN 77 Policy Session: An end user perspective: The next gTLD application window
by apisan＠unam.mx June 12, 2023

June 12, 2023

[[-- Translated text (en -> es) --]] Hola a todos, parece que este mensaje se puede resumir así: 1. no hay pruebas de que la última ronda de nuevos gTLD, que ahora tiene diez años, haya hecho mucho bien; 2. la única razón para que los grandes usuarios finales de Internet se preocupen por los nuevos gTLD son los IDN, que solo son significativos para alfabetos y conjuntos de caracteres totalmente no latinos (además, sabemos que en la región de LAC no hay un interés importante ni soporte para IDN fuera de tres idiomas indígenas como máximo); 3. nunca entendimos cuál es el riesgo de los nuevos gTLD, así que vamos a ocultarlo; 4. aquellos que cabildean por nuevos gTLD no están declarando sus intereses en la industria; 5. pero debemos continuar con los nuevos gTLD sin más consultas. Eso sí, no veo como mi misión traducir estos mensajes a un inglés sencillo, pero parece que a veces un hablante no nativo debe ayudar porque, si el mensaje original es incomprensible, la traducción automática lo hace completamente incomunicable para aquellos. no criados en la lengua del Imperio. Espero que esto sea útil particularmente para los hablantes de español, portugués, francés y holandés entre nosotros. Alejandro Pisanty ________________________________ De: lac-discuss-en <lac-discuss-en-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> en nombre de Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com> Enviado: domingo, 11 de junio de 2023 04:09 p. m. Para: Claire C. Craig CC: LAC Discuss Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-en] ICANN 77 Policy Session: An end user perspective: The next gTLD application window Dear Claire: Back in 2012 a polyglot group of us in At-Large spent a little time in reflective conversation looking at how we were representing the Internet end user perspective inside in a time when the dynamics of Internet end user growth was in the East and South. Access and cost of access plus use cases were priority concerns for these users. We struggled to fit these into the ICANN policy remit. Everyone of us felt that ICANN's technical coordination role of the Internet identifiers was going pretty well and truly enhancing the stability, reliability and security of the Internet. The high priority interest was to find ways to embrace these new entrants and make them feel welcome enough to find cause to commit to the ICANN agenda and join the community. We thought co-opting them more meaningfully into the governance mechanisms and finding more ways to engage them in their own language and giving them more opportunities to participate in the business of the domain system would be good ways to bind them to the ICANN agenda. We felt that a more holistic view of the Internet governance imperative could be built on a more inclusive and collaborative multi stakeholder model. Those perspectives were positioned as a 'over the horizon' view and outlined in a white paper "Making ICANN Relevant, Responsive and Respected"; labeled the "R3" paper. My survey of the 2023 landscape suggests those challenges are still with us. As a participant on several review teams, GNSO WGs, a few CCWGs and pen holder for several ALAC policy advice to the Board on the high interest matters, my positions come with a long and well documented record of advocacy in the At-Large in general and on the ALAC in particular. I will not abandon nor repudiate those positions. The principal premise of the gTLD round of 2012 was that it was a demand response and required to bring new competition to the domain name marketplace. Then as now, there is scant evidence of that demand. And were we to use the usual economic indicators that frame a competitive market, at least one or more of those deterministic indicators - I like to look at price movement for domain names - are not supporting the stated objective. The task now is to identify the drivers of greater relevance for this next gTLD round to the global community. Here is where the history of the last round suggests some recalibration may be necessary. We still believe that when internet end users see their language groups embedded in the domain name infrastructure, having more skin in the game inures to more respect for the MSM and increased relevance to them of the ICANN remit. This is the gravamen of the At-Large support for IDNs, driven largely by keen engagement of our At-Large colleagues from the East. It is the At-Large's business to be gungho for IDNs in every way it avances that mission. The SubPro WG offered scores of recommendations that would mediate and address some of the ills of the last round as the evidence showed. They were expected to be in place before the next round. Some are adopted but there is still a bit of an argy bargy between contending stakeholders. Continued At-Large engagement must be felt here. Numbers matter. The At-Large and the ALAC championed Applicant Support because we believed more direct investment in the domain name business and system will insure improved engagement and responsiveness of ICANN to those making up the great majority of Internet end users. Notwithstanding significant opposition, we managed to craft a common cause in collaborating with the NCUC. Here I publicly acknowledge the seminal role of my friend Evan Leibovitch in this effort. The evidence was maybe the intervention was too small, too unknown where it mattered most and a little late for the full impact of that policy. Furthermore, it is my view the criteria and process developed for assessment of neediness stifled enthusiasm of would-be beneficiaries. Even as we ensure the fitness of this [anticipated] round's version of the Applicant Guidebook, the At-Large must advocate for a more applicant-friendly criteria and transparent eligibility process. The centrality of the definition of "community" to the community application process must not be underestimated. Similarly with community applications, it is in the At-Large's interest to show and be heard in all efforts to fully embrace those deemed community applications in the anticipated round. If you think about it at a philosophical level and consider how a value bestowed by ICANN on a string delegated to an entity results in satisfied end user interests, alchemy comes to mind. I can see a case for a closed generic gTLD instantiating improved DNS security and downstream business benefits to end users even as I'm ambivalent on what closed generics could mean to the other stakeholders in the DNS business overall. I have been watching with some interest the "Facilitated Dialogue" between the parties - ALAC, GNSO, GAC - on the subject. Although the caveat is presented that the views are individual and not to be relegated to the originating stakeholder grouping, I would encourage the ALAC to take a benign view and not offer any resistance to closed generics, protocols observed. For even if it is only the prospect of an altruistic business model, closed generics should be allowed on principle. The use case horse for strings has already bolted. A denial could conceivably lead to a claim for equal protection. The premise of a more competitive market for domain names with a new round is fraught. But my view is that giving all of them room to breathe and letting them bloom - or not! - is the best posture for the At-Large. The case for domain name expansion as an existential threat to the stability and security of the internet or degrading to end user interests is not made. Carlton Samuels ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= On Fri, 9 Jun 2023 at 07:55, Claire C. Craig <claireccraig(a)gmail.com<mailto:claireccraig@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear All We have been asked to consult with the LACRALO Community to provide input for the following: At ICANN77, the ALAC is hosting a community session on the end user perspective ahead of the next gTLD application window on Monday, 12 June, 13:45 - 15:00. The session will be a round table discussion of the five ICANN RALOs on the new gTLD program. Focusing on topics such as: * Applicant Support * IDNs/UA * Community applications * Promoting the new round * Experiences from the previous round * RALOs expectations and needs of the next gTLDs rounds The role of the RALOs during this session is to provide input from Internet end users on the next gTLD round. The session will help us facilitate communications to prospective and possible applicants with general focus on end users needs and interests. Claire C. Craig LACRALO Secretarit _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

1 0