[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] Re: For your review - draft Initial Report

Wed Sep 12 11:55:02 UTC 2018

Thanks, Daniel, we'll note this as one of the topics to be further discussed. 

Best regards,

Marika

On 9/12/18, 05:46, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield at w3.org> wrote:

    Hello Marika, all

    thanks to the staff for putting this draft together.

    I have to re-read the details of the mechanisms analysis but I wanted to 
    react first on the scoping part of our deliverable.

    The truth is, there isn't much about scoping for fund allocation in this 
    report, except in the preample, now relegated in a annex with a 
    misleading title (no longer a preample).

    At some point, the report says "The charter specifies that as part of 
    this proposal, the CCWG is also expected to consider the scope (see for 
    further details below) of fund allocation"

    but I couldn't find a section on "scope of fund allocation" below it, 
    and the section entitled "Scope of the CCWG" is mostly about mechanisms, 
    not about guidelines for evaluating the value of future proposals in 
    weighting relevance to the ICANN mission and goodness for the greater 
    internet community (as our charter clearly states it).

    I think the preamble should be used as content for a new section (not an 
    annex) on Scoping of fund allocation (focused on Charter question 2). At 
    a minimum, I think, if it stays as annex, it should be renamed something 
    like "Guidance for proposal review and selection" instead of Preamble.

    Thanks.

    On 2018-09-12 02:36, Marika Konings wrote:
    > Dear All,
    > 
    > As discussed during last week’s meeting, please find attached for your
    > review the draft Initial Report in Word and PDF format. As tasked by
    > the CCWG, the responses to the charter questions in section 5 are
    > derived from the CCWG deliberations to date as well as the input
    > provided by external experts. Similarly, the draft preliminary
    > recommendations and implementation guidance are derived from those
    > same responses – these are not staff recommendations or
    > interpretations. It is now up to the CCWG to review the Initial Report
    > and identify the areas where changes, additions and/or further
    > clarifications are needed. As outlined during the last meeting, the
    > proposed process and timeline is as follows:
    > 
    > Proposed process:
    > 
    > 
    >   *   Please do not submit a redline of substantive items in the text,
    > as it will be difficult to reconcile possible conflicting positions
    > and input from many individuals. Minor edits, grammar corrections are
    > welcome in redline format.
    >   *   If you want to comment on a specific passage of text, please
    > identify the page number, line number (see pdf version) and the
    > section, for example, page xx, line x, beginning with the text “. . .”
    > If there is a specific text edit you would like to suggest, please
    > include this in your email.
    >   *   Minor edits, such as typo corrections, may not require further
    > discussion. If you raise substantive questions or concerns about an
    > area of the text, these will be discussed on an upcoming call, so that
    > the CCWG may seek resolution that is supported by the group.
    >   *   The purpose of this approach is to ensure that all questions and
    > concerns are addressed, while also ensuring that the text of the
    > report reflects the perspective of the full group as opposed to any
    > one individual within the group
    > 
    > Timeline:
    > 
    > 
    >   *   As soon as possible, but no later than Monday 17 September -
    > CCWG to identify through submissions on the mailing list which
    > sections/items of the report require further discussion / review.
    >   *   18 September 2018 - Leadership team to review items identified
    > and develop call schedule to consider these items (tentative schedule
    > hereunder).
    >   *   20 September / 27 September / 8 October – CCWG meetings to
    > discuss sections / items identified (may be modified depending on # of
    > issues identified)
    >   *   At the latest by 8 October 2018 - Publication of Initial Report
    > for public comment.
    >   *   ICANN63 – Monday 22 October from 13.30 – 1500 - Present Initial
    > Report to Community and solicit input.
    > 
    > As highlighted above, please identify through submission on the
    > mailing list which sections / items of the require further discussion
    > / review by Monday 17 September at the latest.
    > 
    > Thanks,
    > 
    > Emily, Joke and Marika
    > 
    > Marika Konings
    > Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet
    > Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
    > Email: marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>
    > 
    > Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO
    > Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive
    > courses<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_gnso&d=DwIDaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=1lmFOPJqpnNbPY3zm8rghyN7kbSy-KLLTMlaVVKT93k&s=XfFf3XbHkYP-gpjZRDGDkxS8pBAO3XEWTMKLuEOrQV0&e=> and visiting the GNSO
    > Newcomer
    > pages<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gnso.icann.org_files_gnso_presentations_policy-2Defforts.htm-23newcomers&d=DwIDaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=1lmFOPJqpnNbPY3zm8rghyN7kbSy-KLLTMlaVVKT93k&s=8qcMry6jSwKiwHyN3ye_QGaBDdNZEGnvxAezgRFSLqY&e=>.
    > 
    > 
    > _______________________________________________
    > Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
    > Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
    > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds