<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><font color="#800000">Colleagues, <br>
</font></p>
<p><font color="#800000">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? <br>
</font></p>
<p><font color="#800000">Sam L. </font><font size="+3"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"></span></font></p>
<p><font size="+3"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"></span></font></p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/18/2019 1:55 PM, Marika Konings
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:FB831AC6-AC80-4F2D-A882-B5947533E40F@icann.org">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:-webkit-standard;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Sending
on behalf of the CCWG Co-Chairs<o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Dear
all,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:153.6pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:153.6pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:153.6pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">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. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:153.6pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">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.”</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"-webkit-standard",serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:153.6pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">The
leadership team proposes that the CCWG review the poll
results, suggested approach, and report revisions
<b>by the end of this week (Friday 20 December)</b> and that
we open the public comment forum on Monday 23 December (see
proposed announcement attached).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:153.6pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Thanks
in advance for your review.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:153.6pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Kind
regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Erika
and Ching<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org">Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds</a>
_______________________________________________
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 (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). 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.</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>