Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.
Skip to main content

ALAC Statement on the Consumer Metrics Final Advice

Last Updated:
Date

Olivier Crépin-Leblond, the Chair of the ALAC and At-Large member from the European Regional At-Large Organization (EURALO), composed an initial draft of this Statement after discussion of the topic within At-Large.

On 18 August 2012, this Statement [PDF, 416 KB] was posted on the At-Large Consumer Metrics Final Advice Workspace.

On 23 August 2012, the Chair of the ALAC, requested ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC to send a call for comments on the draft Statement to all At-Large members via the ALAC-Announce Mailing List.

On 30 August 2012, after receiving comments in support of the draft, the Chair of the ALAC requested that Staff open a five-day ALAC ratification on the proposed Statement.

On 7 September 2012, Staff confirmed that the online vote resulted in the ALAC endorsing the Statement with 12 votes in favor, 0 votes against, and 1 abstention. You may review the result independently under:

https://www.bigpulse.com/pollresults?code=26207cqN8SqGbdnG9D4bnESz.

The Chair then requested that the Statement be transmitted to the GNSO, copying the ICANN Staff member responsible for this topic.


Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro abstained in this vote. She has asked that her reason for abstaining be noted on the record.

On 11/09/2012 02:41, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:

Dear Olivier,

As you know, I had placed my vote based on reading the wrong question. Having read the question, I would elect to abstain. These are my reasons:

I do not discount the excellent work that has been done by the Working Group tasked with addressing the Board's concerns in terms of identification of clear metrics. I note that the WG had also advised that this was only a partial evaluation of what is actually required under the Affirmation of Commitments. It is my strong view that with something that affects the consumers and public interest (not just because of the up and coming launch of the gTLDs) but because this has been consistently raised by the global community that to limit the advisory scope by not including discussions on consequences of measuring performance aside from a partial identification is not in the interest of the end users.

Therefore in good conscience, whilst I commend the WG for the excellent work in identifying some of the metrics, I must abstain for reasons aforementioned.

Best Regards,
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro