[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Extension of Public Comment Deadline and Next CCWG Meeting
erika at erikamann.com
Tue Nov 27 14:16:42 UTC 2018
Dear Daniel -
I hope that we will receive more comments during the extended public comment period.
We certainly will review the incoming comments and will judge them against our goals and obligations, as we have defined them in our initial report. Personally I believe that new ideas will not find the support from the broader AC/SO community but this is something we should discuss after the comment period will close.
Let us wait until we have received more comments - hopefully - and until we all had a chance to review these comments.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 27, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Daniel Dardailler <danield at w3.org> wrote:
> Thanks, I filled the doodle.
> Prior to the meeting, it would be good to have a summary report on the nature of the comments received.
> So far, at https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-new-gtld-auction-proceeds-initial-08oct18/2018q4/date.html
> I see only one "comment", spread over several messages, which is not about the CCWG work in itself, i.e. on the proposed mechanisms or scope, but a grant proposal in its own right, supported by many apparently, and related to better outreach for the global TLD market. As it happens, this particular idea has some issues attached to it that needs to be re-discussed (it's in the example list, last one).
> IMO, it's clearly not the right time for this proposal to be discussed, and if the added review time is just to gain more support for a particular proposal, it's just wasted time, for them and for us, delaying the grant program real start. People sending their support will have to redo it when the framework for accepting projects is up and running.
> As it stands, I'm a bit concerned - and I'd like a clarification by the staff or chairs, or whoever feels entitled - that the intent of this proposal is to actually create a specific mechanism, at the structural level of the future ICANN Auction grant agency (for lack of a better name), just to fund their project. If that is the case, then I am firmly opposed to this development. We worked 2 years on the mechanisms, with a clear open mind about what could be funded, and now is not the time to reopen our deliverable.
> So to summarize my reaction to the only comment we got so far: if it's a request for a proposal: it's later. If it's a request for a new mechanism: it's too late.
> Note that I nothing against the idea of a global markcomm program for TLDs for the masses, and I actually think this would be inline with some of the W3C's ideas about decentralization of social networking IDs and the likes, but process-wise, this proposal is out of line.
>> On 2018-11-27 12:39, Emily Barabas wrote:
>> Dear CCWG members,
>> The public comment period for the Initial Report of the New gTLD
>> Auction Proceeds Cross-Community Working Group was originally
>> scheduled to close today, 27 November 2018. Due to requests from
>> community members to extend the deadline and provide additional time
>> for input, the Co-Chairs are proposing to extend the public comment
>> period by two weeks. The new close date will be 11 December 2018.
>> Please take a moment to fill out this doodle poll to assist with
>> scheduling a CCWG meeting the week of 17 December:
>> Kind regards,
>> Emily Barabas | Policy Manager
>> ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
>> Email: emily.barabas at icann.org | Phone: +31 (0)6 84507976
>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
More information about the Ccwg-auctionproceeds