Latest news of the domain name industry

Recent Posts

An end to “Club Med for geeks” ICANN?

Kevin Murphy, May 27, 2025, 18:23:48 (UTC), Domain Policy

ICANN has dragged its community to 60 cities around the world over the 26 years and 75 in-person meetings since its foundation, but that degree of globe-trotting could soon come to an end.

A recently closed public comment period saw mixed responses to ICANN’s plan to reform its meetings strategy, but there was little dissent on one proposal; the community seems to be cool with ICANN narrowing the diversity of its venues.

The community was asked whether ICANN should prioritize affordability when it picks its host cities, even if that means it has to sign up to discounted long-term commitments on venues and hotels and return to the same locations over and over again.

They all said “Yes”. There was no division along the usual party lines.

ICANN is obligated by its bylaws to rotate its meetings around five geographic regions, but there’s no requirement to visit a diversity of nations. Hub cities such as Los Angeles, Singapore and Buenos Aires have played host multiple times.

Many commenters said that ICANN should stick to its geographic rotation commitments even if it means visiting fewer locations. Tucows suggested that one meeting per year should be in a “unique” location.

Perhaps the most on-point comment came from Blacknight Solutions boss Michele Neylon. He wrote: “ICANN meetings are work, so returning to well equipped facilities in accessible locations shouldn’t be a problem.”

A change of policy on meeting locations could also incidentally go some way to address the perception (not, I think, held by people who actually attend them) that ICANN spaffs cash jetting its community around the world on a series of cocktail-fuelled exotic jollies.

The most famous expression of this belief came perhaps in a 2008 Computerworld article, picked up by the Wall Street Journal, that ICANN was little more than a borderline corrupt “Club Med for geeks”.

But the effort to reform the meetings strategy is purely a financial one. ICANN wants to cut the cost of meetings at a time when its revenues can no longer be relied upon to predictably head north every year.

Perhaps the key idea in the new batch of proposals is whether to cut the length of its early-year Community Forum from six days to five, perhaps by rejiggering some of the scheduling so larger rooms at the venue do not need to be rented for as long.

There was much less agreement here. Supporters of the idea included the Intellectual Property Constituency, which pointed out that IP lawyers have paid work with other clients that they could be getting on with with a day in hand.

Opponents of the idea included the Registrars Stakeholder Group, which said: “This is unlikely to save significant costs as travel needs, the biggest expense to ICANN, does not change, although hotel and venue costs would be reduced — at the expense of getting all the required work done.

Another idea that received mixed opinions was whether the ICANN board’s meetings with the community’s various stakeholder groups would be better consolidated into one community-wide session, to reduce what is often duplicative and navel-gazey work.

The Non-Commercial Stakeholders Group said the move was a good idea and would “significantly enhance transparency, promote collective understanding, and reduce redundancy from separate interactions”.

Opposing, the IPC said: “The perspective of an individual group can easily be diluted or ignored in community-wide engagement sessions. The IPC values its one-on-one time with the Board”.

Commenters addressed a range of other questions related to the ICANN-drafted proposals.

Notably, while ICANN already seems to have ruled out bringing in registration fees for its meetings, which are all currently free on the door, registrars as represented by the RrSG, Tucows and Blacknight all suggested a nominal attendance fee should still be considered.

Comments can be read here, or you can wait for the ICANN staff summary, which is due to be published next week.

Domain Incite relies on support from readers like you to survive. Please consider making a one-off or recurring donation via PayPal. Please support Domain Incite, the independent source of news, analysis and opinion for the domain name industry and ICANN community.

Tagged: ,

Add Your Comment