Dear Daniel, A couple of points as responded in the Googledoc: 1. We did not discuss data governance and metrics, only that the requisite data be available to support the next CCT Review. That should suffice, I think. 2. This goes into too much detail and I prefer to let the ATRT3 recommendation speak for itself. I have also now added a summary at the end that mentions, "value the impact of Specific Reviews on Internet stability, trust, and accountability from an end-user perspective". Thanks, Justine On Tue, 7 Apr 2026 at 07:53, DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Justine and all,
Following the review of the Public Comment proceeding on the Standard Bylaws Amendment – Transition Article on Specific Reviews, I have proposed the text below for consideration. This input focuses on the timing of the Specific Reviews (particularly the CCT Review) and emphasizes the need for a data governance and metrics framework to enable evidence-based evaluation of the Next Round outcomes.
Proposed Text:
The ALAC and At-Large Community emphasize that the proposed timing for the Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice (CCT) Review under s.27(c)(iv) must be considered in the broader context of Internet stability, trust, and accountability. We recommend that ICANN org explicitly reference the potential implications of review sequencing on end-user interests, particularly regarding the timely identification and mitigation of risks that may arise between review cycles. Furthermore, it is essential that a framework for data governance and metrics be established prior to the Next Round of gTLD delegations. This framework should ensure that all relevant and necessary datasets are available to support evidence-based evaluation of the Next Round outcomes, enabling the next CCT Review to make fully informed, transparent, and actionable recommendations. By adopting this approach, ICANN can strengthen predictability, enhance community confidence, and ensure that review outcomes meaningfully serve the global Internet end-user community.
Thank you
Best regards, Daniel Nanghaka Nanghaka Daniel Khauka. ICT & Digital Transformation Consultant | Knowledge Management & Innovation Specialist | Governance & Development Advisor Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda)
----------------------------------------- *"Working for Africa" * -----------------------------------------
ᐧ
On Tue, 7 Apr 2026 at 01:44, Judith Hellerstein via ALAC <alac@icann.org> wrote:
Hi All,
I agree with Olivier on this. I was wondering the same thing after I read the statement. I will not be on either Wednesday or Thursdays calls because of the Jewish holidays and will be off email Tuesday evening through Thursday evening because of the holiday
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517 E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com Website: www.jhellerstein.com Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 4/6/26 10:59 AM, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC wrote:
Dear Justine,
thank you for sharing this draft. Do community members in At-Large have the same concern than me when it comes to the very concept of creating a "transition article", which points to the ability for ICANN to re-define the goalposts on the fly? If so, how can this concern be expressed in the Statement? I am not saying it is a red line, but it is a matter of concern in an organisation that is supposed to show good governance.
In relation to the "Proposed s.27(b)(iii) - Extension of the Pause Period by SOAC Majority", what is the rationale for allowing such a process that includes all 7 existing SO/ACs when tasks relating to Bylaw amendments are defined in the Bylaws as requiring action from the Empowered Community whereas according to Annex D, Section 1.4(a) and (b) require in:
*iii) The Approval Action relates to an Articles Amendment and is (A) supported by three or more Decisional Participants (including the Articles Amendment PDP Decisional Participant if the Board Notice included a PDP Articles Statement) and (B) not objected to by more than one Decisional Participant.*
This is different to an SO/AC Majority and I do not understand why the Board is not following the Bylaws that relate to such decisions.Perhaps could you please shed the light on this?
Kindest regards,
Olivier
On 06/04/2026 03:34, Justine Chew via OFB-WG wrote:
Dear all,
The draft ALAC statement on “Standard Bylaws Amendment - Transition Article on Specific Reviews” <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OgDmhy6cTnyyPCVENaNqvTAkDf-28hxce_rLLcCD...> is available for final community comments until Wednesday, 8 April 2026. The finalized version will be presented a last time at the OFBWG call on Thursday, 9 April 2026.
Please comment directly in the DRAFT ALAC statement google doc, using the “comment” function.
Our timetable:
1. Reviewer(s): Initial Bullet Point(s) presentation and rationale for discussion – OFB call of Thursday 26 March *DONE* 2. Presentation and discussion of First Draft - OFB call of Thursday 2 April *DONE* 3. Community: Comment on Draft Statement - Monday 6 Apr - Wednesday 8 April 4. Final Draft Presentation - Thursday 9 April 5. ALAC: Vote on Final Statement – Friday 10 April - Monday 13 April 6. Staff: Submission of ALAC Statement – Monday 13 April
Thank you, Justine
_______________________________________________ OFB-WG mailing list -- ofb-wg@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to ofb-wg-leave@icann.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.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ 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.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ 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.