ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[council] Motion on the Endorsement of GNSO Applicants for the Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice (CCT) Review Team

  • To: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [council] Motion on the Endorsement of GNSO Applicants for the Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice (CCT) Review Team
  • From: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 22:30:34 +0000
  • Accept-language: en-US
  • Authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx;
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
  • Spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23
  • Thread-index: AQHRMT7jPOqY+zRpQEegDfELU21xyg==
  • Thread-topic: Motion on the Endorsement of GNSO Applicants for the Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice (CCT) Review Team

Councilors -

For discussion during our next (17 DEC) meeting, please find a motion to submit 
a list (TBD) of CCT-RT applicants who have sought GNSO endorsement.  The Motion 
itself is attached and copied below.

Once adopted, this motion instructs the Secretariat and Chair to inform the 
CCT-RT Selectors of our endorsed applicants, and highlight the interests of the 
GNSO on this topic, and emphasize the need for balanced representation by all 
GNSO stakeholders on this Review Team.  Further, it informs the applicants 
that, if selected, they are expected to represent the GNSO in its entirety, and 
report back on a regular basis during the course of the Review.  Finally, it 
asks the Secretariat to respond to any applicants who were not endorsed (if 
any), thanking them for their interest and encouraging them to stay engaged in 
this important work.  Hoping for a second to this motion prior to our call the 

Regarding the Endorsement Process:  There seem to be two general proposals 
emerging from the discussion on the list.  One approach would simply 
endorse/not endorse each individual candidate, and submit the list to the 
Selectors.  This has the benefit of keeping the focus on individual applicants 
seeking endorsement, and doesn’t put SGs in the position of choosing.  The risk 
is that it shifts this choice to the Selectors, who may decide on a much 
smaller number of applicants, leaving some SGs unhappy with the final 
composition of the RT.  It also diminishes the value & weight of GNSO 
endorsement, if a large number of GNSO-endorsed applicants are not selected.

The other approach would allocate 0-2 endorsements to each SG, and then submit 
the (presumably smaller) aggregated list.  It will take longer and could become 
contentious for any SGs that have received a large number of candidate 
submissions.  But would preserve the weight of our endorsement and ensure that 
all SG positions are represented in the GNSO list.

I propose a compromise/hybrid approach, whereby we take a “first pass” at the 
list of applicants using the first method, and examine the resulting list.  
Presumably it would be larger group of applicants, but some might receive 
multiple endorsements, creating a degree of overlap.  We can then discuss this 
list during our meeting on the 17th, and either (a) add additional names for 
missing SGs and/or (b) work together to improve the balance of the list.

For reference, I would refer you to the list of folks seeking GNSO Endorsement: 

Note that all applicants have been asked to provide GNSO-specific information, 
and have until the end of the day today (7 DEC) to respond. I would ask 
Councilors & SGs to consider only those applicants who have responded to be 
edible for endorsement.

Please post your “first pass” list of endorsed applicants to the Council list 
by next Monday (14 DEC 2015).

Thank you,



Motion on the endorsement of GNSO Applicants for the Competition, Consumer 
Trust and Consumer Choice Review (CCT)


1.     Under the Affirmation of Commitments 
 ICANN launched a process to review the extent to which the introduction of 
gTLDs has promoted Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice (CCT 
Review). This AoC mandated review will also assess the effectiveness of the 
application and evaluation processes, as well as the safeguards put in place by 
ICANN to mitigate issues involved in the introduction or expansion of new gTLDs.

2.     To conduct this review, a Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer 
Choice Review Team will be formed in late 2015. Once formed, the Review Team 
will independently plan its work and schedule.

3.     A call for volunteers was launched on 1 October 2015 (see 
Those applying to serve as a volunteer member, where asked to identify the name 
of the Supporting Organization or Advisory Committee they wish to represent. 26 
applicants identified the GNSO as the Supporting Organization they wished to 
represent (see https://community.icann.org/x/FoRlAw).

4.     Following its meeting on 19 November 2015, the GNSO Council agreed to 
follow up with all 26 applicants to request additional information required to 
reach its decision on endorsement (see 
5.     The GNSO Council has reviewed the information received from the 
applicants requesting GNSO endorsement (see 


1.     The GNSO Council endorses the following applicants: [TBC] and expects 
the selectors for this Review Team to weigh this endorsement as an important 
factor in their selection process.
2.     The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat, on behalf of the GNSO 
Council and Chair, to inform the CCT selectors in writing of the outcome of 
this process. The selectors should also be advised to consider the specific 
consideration to the role of the GNSO regarding the New gTLD implementation and 
ensure that all relevant GNSO stakeholders shall be represented on the CCT RT.
3.     The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the applicants 
that have received endorsement that the GNSO Council expects that, if selected 
for the CCT, the applicant will represent the views of the entire GNSO 
community in their work on the CCT, and provide regular feedback as a group on 
the discussions taking place in the CCT, as well as the positions being taken 
by GNSO Review Team Members.
4.  The GNSO Council instructs the Secretariat to send a response to those 
applicants who did not receive endorsement (if any), thanking them for their 
interest.  The response should also
encourage them to follow the CCT RT work, and participate in Public Comments 
and community discussions.

Attachment: Motion on the endorsement of CCT Candidates - 7 DEC 2015.docx
Description: Motion on the endorsement of CCT Candidates - 7 DEC 2015.docx

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>