Page History
| Note | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
That all applications for new constituencies, including historic applications, be published on the ICANN website with full transparency of decision-making. |
| Working Party (initial assessment of feasibility and usefulness): | CG - Accept as is. |
|---|---|
| Staff (initial assessment of feasibility and usefulness): |
Rationale: MK: accept as-is. Note, this information is already available. CG: Agreed. We're already working on this (for website). |
| Basis for Assessment: | |
| Work in Progress: | Information that is currently available: http://gnso.icann.org/en/about/form-new-constituency.htm |
| Expected Completion Date for Work in Progress: | |
| Milestones: | |
| Responsibility: |
Public Comments Received
Comment # | Submitted By | Affiliation | Comment |
Recommendation 24 (Transparency): That all applications for new constituencies, including historic applications, be published on the ICANN website with full transparency of decision-making. | |||
28 | Paul Diaz | gTLD Registries Stakeholder Group | (Support) |
65 | Osvaldo Novoa | ISPCP | (Support) A standard template should be developed to ensure a coherent approach. |
127 | Will Hudson | If adopted would improve the transparency of the policy development process and promote greater confidence in the validity of adopted policies. | |
190 | Laura Covington, J. Scott Evans, Marie Pattullo | Business Constituency | The BC supports this recommendation. |
261 | Greg Shatan | IPC | (Support) All ICANN decision-making must be subject to the fullest transparency and accountability. In the case of new constituency decisions, this is essential to avoid any actual or perceived unfairness or favouring of the incumbent parties over the new. |
306 | Amr Elsadr |
| This should be the default practice. |
335 | Olivier Crepin-Leblond | ALAC | (It Depends) The ALAC has always supported full transparency and would support transparency in decision-making if this does not endanger frank, open discussions regarding the application amongst decision makers. To protect applicants for positions where a committee selection is needed and for potential At-Large Structures (ALSes), the ALAC has decided to discuss their applications on a private list. The ALAC has followed this practice due to the potential for criticism and/or confidential information of the applicant to be shared and/or picked up by a search engine, thus potentially harming the applicant in other platforms. Some applicants have requested full confidentiality in the treatment of their applications. While the internal discussions about ALS applications remain confidential, the applications themselves are published and so are voting results of the ALAC. The ALAC would be happy to share best practices with the GNSO in protecting applicant confidentiality and privacy. |
