Tuesday, June 26, 2018

A limit of the multistakeholder governance model

I read the ICANN approved board resolutions and a rationale for resolutions on an independent examination. I found that it tells a lot on how the ICANN is becoming an enormous organization which could be compared to some French administration where you sometimes wonder...what people do there.

ITEMS International was appointed as the independent examiner for the At-Large Review (a working group at the ICANN which works on plenty of important things to make Internet better).

Too focused on internal committees and procedures
I stopped on an Input from the ICANN community and I read:
"...many of the problems identified by the ITEMS report do exist. In particular, that: It is too focused on internal committees and procedures, and that it is too focused on enlarging the power and resources received by ALACin the ICANN ecosystem."
I try hard to follow-up with what some groups work on but I not only have a language barrier, I also DON'T HAVE THE NECESSARY TIME for this and with the volumes of documents to understand and the number of calls to participate to, it really takes time. I also sometimes feel that the very small groups working "on their thing"are making it impossible for any new comer to participate...many working group are most of the time the only one to understand what they are doing.

It also takes longer and longer to decide. Isn't it time to simplify procedures and suggest things like "deadlines"?

The ICANN is important for the Internet to keep working properly but aren't we starting to see the limit of the multistakeholder governance model?

The .GAY and .MUSIC new gTLDs
The .GAY and .MUSIC new gTLDs have been in "stand-by" for years: with all the comments, reports, procedures, discussions...can't someone "do something" for a resolution to be taken?

  • Consideration of Reconsideration Request 18-1 for DotMusic Limited: No resolution taken;
  • Consideration of Reconsideration Request 18-2 for dotgay LLC: No resolution taken.
Unless I am wrong, the new gTLD Applicant Guidebook from the first round of the ICANN new gTLD program says that problems of the first round should all be solved before the next round to start: isn't the multistakeholder governance model helping opponents of a future round here? In the case of .GAY ... there are a lot of opponents.

No comments:

.BRAND new gTLD Reports are updated once a month: CLICK HERE !