Before and after the At-Large Community wide teleconference on Tuesday, 14 February 2017, the At-Large Community will have two windows of opportunity to ask Candidates questions and view their responses in written form.
Before the teleconference: To prepare for the interactions with the Candidates in the teleconference, you may ask questions to the Candidates beforehand. Round 1 questions must be sent no later than Friday, 10 February 2017 23:59 UTC.
After the teleconference: After viewing Candidates' responses to questions received before the teleconference and interacting with them during the teleconference, you may ask follow-up questions afterward. Follow-up questions must be sent no later than Thursday, 16 February 2017 23:59 UTC.
Program Admin Staff will consolidate duplicative questions and perform minor editing for clarification, if necessary, before posting. The names of the At-Large members who sent questions will be recorded on the wiki.
Candidates are requested to send their response to program-admin@atlarge.icann.org for posting. Program Admin Staff will send announcement to the Community to view the responses.
All questions and responses will be posted in English.
For both Candidates to be able to read and understand the questions, please write them in English. If you are unable to write in English, Program Admin Staff will provide translation support within our capability (e.g. Spanish, French, Chinese, Turkish).
What efforts would you propose to the board to more effectively engage and dialogue with the more than a billion Internet users that are not familiar with ICANN nor At-Large?
In regards to the At-Large Review that was just conducted, do you believe that it was an omission to not survey internet users that are not currently engaged at ICANN?
What special qualities and experience do you bring to the ICANN Board upon selection that help the other Board Members appreciate and understand the needs of the Internet End User community?
Given that both of you have a history of making much-appreciated contributions to At-Large as well as to ICANN in general, how are you uniquely placed to contribute in the specific context of the Board?
There is an apparent requirement that ICANN Board Members vote for the interest of the Corporation, and not the entity that enabled their holding their Board position. In situations where the interest of individual Internet users (as expressed through ALAC) conflicts with that of the ICANN Corporation, how would you act?
How do you plan to enhance the cooperation between At-Large and NCSG in order to avoid unnecessary duplications and bring synergies in our work to benefit the community?
What will be your main strategy and course if action, as Board Member, in order to augment the resonance and relevance of At-Large & ALAC within ICANN and vis a vis other ACs such as GAC?
What type of recognition and influence do you believe that At-Large, specifically RALO members, have on ICANN’s new structures post the IANA Stewardship Transition?
Should states/countries have more say or less say regarding ccTLD policy? Why?
Alan Greenberg
Leon Sanchez
Q15
Question 15 from hong.xue (on behalf of Chinese Domain Names Users Alliance) sent on
What are your comments and assessments for ICANN's ongoing Review of All Right Protection Measures (RPMs) for all gTLDs? How could the At-Large community effectively take part in the Review process and influence the outcome? What would you propose to reform the RPMs, particularly for new gTLDs, for the interests of global Internet individual users?
At-Large represents the interests of end-users, but there are still vast swathes of geographies that At-Large has still has very limited or no presence in (for instance the Mekong Delta region in Asia). If you become part of the ICANN Board, how will you address this issue?
