[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes and action items from today's CCWG Auction Proceeds Meeting

Thu May 31 07:23:31 UTC 2018

Wrt the preamble, just one syntactic nit:

3.	Projects advancing work related to any of the following topics open 
access, future oriented developments, innovation and open standards, for 
the benefit of the Internet community are encouraged.

is missing punctuation marks, i.e.:

3.	Projects advancing work related to any of the following topics: open 
access, future oriented developments, innovation and open standards, for 
the benefit of the Internet community, are encouraged.

On 2018-05-24 19:33, Marika Konings wrote:
> Dear All,
> 
> Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting.
> Please take particular note of the following action items:
> 
> ACTION ITEM #1: CCWG to review latest version of preamble (see
> attached) and provide any comments at the latest by Wednesday 30 May
> at 18.00 UTC. Comments should focus on any items that are deemed not
> acceptable / objectionable for inclusion in the Initial Report.
> 
> ACTION ITEM #2: CCWG to review latest version of project example (see
> attached) and provide any comments at the latest by Monday 4 June 2018
> at 18.00 UTC. Comments should focus on any items that are deemed not
> acceptable / objectionable for inclusion in the Initial Report.
> [_Note, I made an update in line with the comments provided by Tony
> and Jon in relation to example previously #12 – if there is
> disagreement about this change, please share your feedback with the
> list_]
> 
> ACTION ITEM #4: CCWG to discuss on mailing list next steps for moving
> forward with the four mechanisms.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Marika
> 
> ==============
> 
> NOTES - NEW GTLD AUCTION PROCEEDS CCWG MEETING - 24 MAY 2018
> 
> _These high-level notes are designed to help the CCWG navigate through
> the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the
> transcript and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are
> provided separately and are posted on the wiki at:
> __https://community.icann.org/x/DLHDAw_ [1]_._
> 
> 1. Roll Call
> 
>  	* Attendance will be taken from AC
> 	* Please state your name for transcription purposes and remember to
> mute your microphone before speaking
> 
> 2. Welcome & DOI/SOI Updates
> 
>  	* Please remember to review your DOI/SOI on a regular basis and
> update accordingly
> 
> 3. Response to ICANN Board
> 
> a. Review proposed edits to the preamble (see latest cleaned up
> version attached and
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rrlLk17owAx5dmm1XjD_X-LGlRkVnjKtYw5bh8kDKzw/edit
> [docs.google.com] for redline)
> 
>  	* Board provided input on the original version of the preamble. CCWG
> reviewed input and has made updates accordingly.
> 	* Note that the objective is now to get the document into a state
> that it can be included in the Initial Report for public comment, so
> if there are any elements that are deemed objectionable/not acceptable
> by CCWG these should be flagged as soon as possible.
> 	* Request final comments by email by Wednesday 30 May.
> 	* Remaining questions could also be put forward during public
> session.
> 
> ACTION ITEM #1: CCWG to review latest version of preamble and provide
> any comments at the latest by Wednesday 30 May at 18.00 UTC. Comments
> should focus on any items that are deemed not acceptable /
> objectionable for inclusion in the Initial Report.
> 
> b. Review proposed edits to project examples (see latest clean version
> attached and
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QHJneNt5epskQoGRjnmonM-vW8GyTz_SwBCaftNEgr0/edit#heading=h.gjdgxs
> [docs.google.com] for redline)
> 
> See latest version shared.
> 
>  	* Objective is the same as for the previous document - aim to get it
> into a state for inclusion in the Initial Report following which the
> CCWG can review again and update as needed.
> 
> ACTION ITEM #2: CCWG to review latest version of project examples and
> provide any comments at the latest by Monday 4 June 2018 at 18.00 UTC.
> Comments should focus on any items that are deemed not acceptable /
> objectionable for inclusion in the Initial Report.
> 
> c. Next steps
> 
>  	* See action items #1 and #2
> 
> 4. Review straw poll survey results (see summary results attached as
> well as https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-8KL7RTGDL/
> [surveymonkey.com])
> 
> a. Is it possible to narrow down the # of mechanisms to be further
> considered?
> 
> b. Should additional expertise be sought to further flesh out each
> mechanism?
> 
>  	* See summary results shared together with the agenda
> 	* Based on survey results, is it possible to narrow down the # of
> mechanisms to be further considered in the next phase of work
> (answering the charter questions for each mechanism that would move
> forward to the next phase).
> 	* Note that some questions still remain unanswered such as the #
> amount of funds available noting the parallel conversations in
> relation to the reserve fund as well as ongoing litigation.
> 	* More detail may be needed before any final decision can be made.
> Could ask Sarah Berg to assist in developing a general description of
> these different mechanisms - focused on a clear understanding of what
> each mechanism represents and entails.
> 	* Would it also be possible to switch between mechanisms to see what
> works in practice?
> 	* No statistical difference, very low response rate from members as
> well as participants.
> 	* All criteria have been weighted the same at the moment - is there a
> need to weigh some higher than others?
> 	* Is this more an opinion poll than a fact based poll?
> 	* May not be possible to eliminate any options at this point in time
> - further information and review is needed.
> 	* Consider developing a template table to start work on responding on
> each of the charter questions. This will take sizeable amount of work
> and consultation with experts, including Samantha Eisner and Xavier
> Calvez.
> 	* CCWG to consider during the next meeting whether there is enough
> substance to present during the High Interest Topic session or whether
> a different format should be pursued.
> 
> ACTION ITEM #3: Ask Sarah Berg to assist with a general description of
> each of the mechanism to help explain to the broader community the
> different mechanisms as well as allow the CCWG to focus on any issues.
> 
> 
> ACTION ITEM #4: CCWG to discuss on mailing list next steps for moving
> forward with the four mechanisms.
> 
> ACTION ITEM #5: Staff to share template that could be used for moving
> forward on the charter questions as an example.
> 
> c. Next steps
> 
> 5. Next steps & confirm next meeting (Thursday 31 May at 14.00 UTC)
> 
> _MARIKA KONINGS_
> 
> _Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet
> Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) _
> 
> _Email: marika.konings at icann.org  _
> 
> _ _
> 
> _Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO_
> 
> _Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses [2]
> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages [3]. _
> 
> 
> 
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_DLHDAw&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=4zHolvsBo6lsC2fsFnhbQd0l8fVzyqdj0t9oV6_NWjM&s=-vuUpZTVZXrpFcq3-nA--Ltl_ESCT71X4cBhx3axkEY&e=
> [2] http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso
> [3]
> http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers
> _______________________________________________
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds