[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] For final review - proposed CCWG Final Report, indicative poll results and public comment announcement

[Sam Lanfranco]

Erika,

Okay, when I make such observations, I am not like a dog with a bone. I 
don't hang on to them for dear lilfe.

After discussion, more evidence and logic, I can even vote against what 
I put on the table.

Sam

On 12/18/2019 11:33 PM, Erika Mann wrote:
> Sam - let’s keep it as it is, the language reflects reality. We have a 
> consensus call after the next Public Comment period and, hopefully by 
> then, all members are going to have consulted with their constituents 
> are are able to vote.
>
> Kind regards,
> Erika
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 18, 2019, at 11:10 PM, Sam Lanfranco <sam at lanfranco.net 
> <mailto:sam at lanfranco.net>> wrote:Colleagues,
>>
>> With regard to the fact that some of the rankings are close, and that 
>> nine of twenty-three participants did not respond, I am not sure of 
>> the best way forward here. Recommending mechanism A and mechanism B, 
>> while not discarding mechanism C yet, gives little guidance to our 
>> other colleagues with regard to how our deliberations assessed the 
>> relative strengths and weaknesses of the three mechanisms. Is there 
>> any way to up the response rate? Can we query to find out if poll 
>> absence was a deliberate abstention or an oversight?
>>
>> Sam L.
>>
>> On 12/18/2019 1:55 PM, Marika Konings wrote:
>>>
>>> /Sending on behalf of the CCWG Co-Chairs/
>>>
>>> //
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> Thank you for those who participated in the indicative poll and 
>>> those who submitted comments on the most recent draft of the 
>>> proposed Final Report. Attached please find the results of the 
>>> indicative poll. As summarized in the spreadsheet, fourteen members 
>>> out of twenty-three members responded. In addition, eight 
>>> participants provided their input.
>>>
>>> In response to the question “Are you of the view that the CCWG 
>>> should only recommend one mechanism for ICANN Board consideration, 
>>> even if your preferred mechanism does not come out as the preferred 
>>> mechanism of the CCWG overall?”, six members indicated their 
>>> preference to recommend the top two ranked mechanisms to the ICANN 
>>> Board, five members indicated their preference to only recommend 1 
>>> mechanism, two members indicated their preference to recommend all 
>>> three mechanism and one member indicated no preference.
>>>
>>> In response to the ranking, seven members recommended mechanism A as 
>>> their preferred mechanism, four members ranked mechanism B as their 
>>> preferred mechanism and three members ranked mechanism C first.
>>>
>>> After reviewing these results, the leadership team believes that the 
>>> best path forward is to recommend mechanism A and mechanism B in the 
>>> proposed Final Report, but the leadership team is not discarding 
>>> mechanism C (an ICANN Foundation) yet. The attached revision to the 
>>> proposed Final Report includes updates based on the most recent 
>>> round of comments from members, as well as revisions in line with 
>>> the leadership team’s suggested approach regarding the mechanisms. 
>>> Note that the report includes the following text: “As a number of 
>>> members did not participate in the indicative survey it is possible 
>>> that the outcome could change as a result of further deliberations, 
>>> consideration of input received and consultations by the members 
>>> with their respective appointing organizations.”
>>>
>>> The leadership team proposes that the CCWG review the poll results, 
>>> suggested approach, and report revisions *by the end of this week 
>>> (Friday 20 December)* and that we open the public comment forum on 
>>> Monday 23 December (see proposed announcement attached).
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance for your review.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Erika and Ching
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
>>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
>> _______________________________________________
>> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of 
>> your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list 
>> accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy 
>> (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of 
>> Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the 
>> Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, 
>> including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling 
>> delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20191219/37dd2e37/attachment.html>