[Dt-cwg-auctionproceeds] mp3 and attendance new gTLD Auction Proceeds Drafting Team 05 May 2016
Terri Agnew
terri.agnew at icann.org
Thu May 5 16:31:45 UTC 2016
Dear All,
Please find the MP3 recording for the new gTLD Auction Proceeds Drafting Team held on 05 May 2016 at 13:00 UTC: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-auction-proceeds-05may16-en.mp3<http://mailer.samanage.com/wf/click?upn=NrFWbrBstcrPWP369qgbqlXiSKeL20xnUXzI03ZqpsuDGgbutH3nVNCyFQnIoBtiHFTcaeu4QmqxpOexJvnwAkPcmIG26NqFKZeJ-2Bvi1zY0-3D_nEX-2FaOijqgcJlSz5SkmueJu3tRbmaDiuX89gT35tStEeSHP9whdoceObpMxYsFLQddiMZpQjIv8dk6BsBGSJXH7VWN4SGLCJgbGKCk6E-2FTErjF4OKNQt65Dk9NF54IJ9kQpmDNySj7bbNz9G4dXi5BgbCZotTx8KNfyeB0z00f8KsMfETeTNKd7vy2kKI7tttQUIwid4NAhxXgT3nZYwmqrZAE23AVgXeBbZ5vY3ZaXOAn2r2ETByuiEkBLeJUV9tQji8CH1jKnXiuqfxcIo70r-2FE0K9PK5b9P-2FksTgVG1QhmD5lVxburjYRdFkuh549LrgZPa6I1-2BLVQg3ITpp1Tj7pfUcRBF8S0D-2FFlTa5tV4bhtUYdjF4e-2FV2r9zleEhIOT2Hd5xeSl2bRnCPX7L-2BTBIqUG6PNQWRZzq8UYS4qQZyZgY-2B98NFdkgGNLaRqLyCLfRKTJcBeyamwzgEHSVTr3QBSdx-2FcoTctTwlW4PrTmkJ3FHSfqLtnm2XGD6nLKtK>
On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#may
The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar
Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/dt-cwg-auctionproceeds/
Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/px6AAw
Attendees:
ALAC
Alan Greenberg
ASO
Sylvia Cadena
ccNSO
Will not be participating in the drafting team
GAC
Olga Cavalli
GNSO
Jonathan Robinson
RSSAC
SSAC
Russ Mundy
Lyman Chapin
Board
Board Liaisons
Erika Mann
Asha Hemrajani
Board appointed staff advisors
Samantha Eisner
Apologies:
none
ICANN staff:
Marika Konings
Lauren Allison
Vinciane Koenigsfeld
Julie Hedlund
Glen de Saint Gery
David Tait
Terri Agnew
** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Terri Agnew
-------------------------------
Adobe Connect chat transcript for Thursday, 05 May 2016
Terri Agnew:Welcome to the New gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG Charter Drafting Team held on Thursday, 05 May 2016
Olga Cavalli - GAC:Hi Terri can you enable my audio on adobe?
Terri Agnew:Hi Olga, yes, mics will be active. This call will begin in 30 minutes.
Olga Cavalli - GAC:sure thanks
Terri Agnew:Mics are now active
Erika Mann:I'm in but I think someone put me again on forced mute
Terri Agnew:Hi Erika, you will need to active your mic. Directions are on screen now
Erika Mann:Terri, the problem is always the same, 'someone' puts me when I enter on mute. I can see the curser moving. I mentioned this before. On my end, I'm fine, not muted.
Terri Agnew:Would you like the op to dial out to you on the telephone?
Erika Mann:I re-changed settings on my end as well, let's try if it works
Sylvia Cadena 2:A lot of echo coming from Jonathan's line
Asha Hemrajani:Good evening
RussMundy-SSAC:I'm dialed in to the audio bridge but am not hearing anything
Asha Hemrajani:lot of echo when Terri speaks on the audio bridge
RussMundy-SSAC:dialed back in am now on
Sylvia Cadena 2:A lot of echo
Sylvia Cadena 2:Thank you Terri. Thanks Jonathan, no comments to the agenda from my side.
Sylvia Cadena 2:Agree,
Erika Mann:Sam - there were two comments from Alan as well
Jonathan Robinson:That's helpful Sam. It speaks to the ongoing chain of accountability of a donation
Olga Cavalli:sorry I had to change my coputer
Asha Hemrajani:Yes I think Sam has already addressed Alan's two comments via email already, but worthwhile to discuss those again after we go through Jonathan's comments.
Erika Mann:I raise my hand
Sylvia Cadena 2:I also have raised my hand
Erika Mann:Lauren/Terry - you have to unmute me!
Terri Agnew:@Erika, I will unmute you
Terri Agnew:@Erika, I have muted you again
Erika Mann:Thanks Terri
Erika Mann:Jonathan, I like to come back
Sylvia Cadena 2:I realy agree with that. Very important to address it as you so clearly point it out.
Asha Hemrajani:Agree Jonathan, that is something we should pick up on again
Sylvia Cadena 2:Agree with Alan.
Olga Cavalli:+ 1 to Alan
Erika Mann:I think we need a reference in the Charter that the allocation of the funds must be appropriate to the mission/core values and must the respect the tax-excempt status ...
Asha Hemrajani:Sylvia, I cannot make out what you are saying - your voice is very muffled
Alan Greenberg:If I understood Russ's comment correctly, I have the same concern. If we must narrowly adhere to ICANN 's mission, I am not sure how we differentiate from our regular work and what this money will be used for.
Alan Greenberg:That is why I asked about the AG reference to "doing good things with regard to the Internet" where I thought we had our largest leveage.
Alan Greenberg:leverage
RussMundy-SSAC:yes, Alan, that is my concern
RussMundy-SSAC:although it may not be feasible, the informal guidance I have from ssac members is that doing things for the "good of the Internet" is a highly desirable result
Erika Mann:Jonathan, I have a direct point to make
Lyman Chapin (SSAC):@Russ +1
RussMundy-SSAC:but may not fully fit ICANN mission
Jonathan Robinson:@Russ. "Consitent with" may be the helpful phrase here
RussMundy-SSAC:Thanks Jonathan & Sam, this is very helpful
Alan Greenberg:@Jonathan. YES, that would be very good. COnsistant with is FAR better than furthering the mission.
Alan Greenberg:My poster child for something that we should be able to do is fund Internet Exchange Points. There is great value to the internet in developing regions, and is certainly not counter to our mission, but it is IN our mission.
Olga Cavalli:good point Alan
Asha Hemrajani:I am having difficulty understanding Sylvia, could someone summarize what she is saying?
Alan Greenberg:Saying that the requirement to explain how a project meets out mission is a responsibility of the applicant to document in application.
Alan Greenberg:Not to be specified in detail by us or ccwg
Erika Mann:Agree Alan
Asha Hemrajani:Thanks Alan for transcribing Sylvia's point - yes agree with that.
Sylvia Cadena 2:Thanks Alan :)
Sylvia Cadena 2:My only comment there, will be to expand that to involvement on political activities and lobbying not only on the US space, but also globally.
Asha Hemrajani:No worries Sam! totally understand!
Erika Mann:Sylvia is right
Asha Hemrajani:Yes agree Sylvia
Sylvia Cadena 2:Yes, fully agree with spending more time and do a deep review to provide clear guidelines for the conflict of interests. Agree with Asha. The more that can be done on that front the better
Alan Greenberg:Are we talking about the individuals on the CCWG, or those making the funding decisions?
Samantha Eisner:Apologies again for the background noise here. 1300 UTC calls are normally quiet times in my house!
Erika Mann:Asha, state their conflict of interest but not their interest ... tiny difference but relevant
Asha Hemrajani:@Alan, I would think both
Erika Mann:Alan - only those involved in the dstribution of the fund
Sylvia Cadena 2:I think on both Alan.
Sylvia Cadena 2:Agree with Asha. Declare your interest, not only the conflict of interest
Sylvia Cadena 2:I believe that will be to decide on the process.
Sylvia Cadena 2:100% agree with Alan.
Erika Mann:Agree with Alan
Sylvia Cadena 2:The CCWG should not be the ones to make decisions.
RussMundy-SSAC:I fully agree with what Alan is saying
Sylvia Cadena 2:Thanks Alan. Agree.
Olga Cavalli:+1 to Alan
Sylvia Cadena 2:I understand, but due to the amount of the money at play, it is very important to be very stringent and point any potential risks
Erika Mann:The Echo is on my end
Sylvia Cadena 2:Yes, that is my opinion Erika. We should include on the charter that the CCWG should focus on the process.
Sylvia Cadena 2:Agree with Asha.
Asha Hemrajani:+1 Alan
Jonathan Robinson:@Alan. Agreed, this is an overarching document. that will flow through all phases of the project.
Sylvia Cadena 2:Agree.
Asha Hemrajani:yes agreed! We have yet to make this fundamental decision
Asha Hemrajani:ok Alan, need your transcribing again
Asha Hemrajani:Sylvia sounds super muffled to me for some reason :-(
Sylvia Cadena 2:Sorry, will type it here
Asha Hemrajani:Thanks Sylvia
Sylvia Cadena 2:CCWG to focus on process, outcome to be the recommendation about what mechanism to choose to actaully allocate the funds. Each mechanism has different rules (example foundation vs endowment) so that will be very messy for the CCWG as they will be playing by all sorts of rules
Asha Hemrajani:yes indeed Jonathan, this is an overarching point
Sylvia Cadena 2:Thanks for extending it, really appreciate to be able to go through in enough detail to make progress
Sylvia Cadena 2:100% agree with that. Rules should be drafted to allow for different types of organization to benefit /access funds
Jonathan Robinson:Thinking of procees / structure / mechanics as outputs from the CWG?
Asha Hemrajani:@Jonathan, I am not so sure we should rule out some level of disbursement at this stage...it could be very high level of disbursement? eg splitting the funds into eg 3 big buckets?
Sylvia Cadena 2:I don't think we should discuss disbursements
Sylvia Cadena 2:That should be for the CCWG to determine in my opinion.
Sylvia Cadena 2:No need to apologize for that :)
Sylvia Cadena 2:I already explained on my comment before, that it is the responsibility of the applicant to explain how their proposal fits or not with ICANN's mission. I think that by changing the order, you also change priorities. I do not agree
Sylvia Cadena 2:It is important to have the ICANN's mission first, so that it is clear that gives scope for the funding to be allocated.
Samantha Eisner:ICANN would also have an obligation to review if the mission is furthered, as actions outside of ICANN's mission could subjet ICANN to an IRP
Erika Mann:Jonathan I like to say something
Samantha Eisner:The applicant's explanation of how the mission is met would be a very important item in consideration, and I do agree that it should be a responsibility of the applicant to explain how the proposal fits the mission
Asha Hemrajani:@sylvia re discussing disbursements, I did not mean the DT should discuss disbursements
RussMundy-SSAC:I support Asha's suggestion
Samantha Eisner:I'd be happy to help support efforts at extraction
Asha Hemrajani:I meant that we cannot at this stage rule out that the CCWG does not do disbursements
Sylvia Cadena 2:Me too, happy to help with those efforts, if there is some support from someone else
Asha Hemrajani:+1 Erika
Sylvia Cadena 2:I say we should rule out that they approve disbursements
Lyman Chapin (SSAC):@Asha I would be very worried about convening a CCWG that would directly make disbursements, rather than design the process(es) by which disbursements will be made.
Erika Mann:Jonathan- yes, even better
Asha Hemrajani:Yes Jonathan, makes sense
RussMundy-SSAC:+1 Lyman
Sylvia Cadena 2:Will do that Jonathan. On the google doc? as comments on the word file?
Erika Mann:Jonathan, one more point, we need to agree on guiding principles Russ and I identified from the comments we reviewed
Asha Hemrajani:@lyman, I agree that the CCWG has to design the processes & structure. I was referring to a high level of disbursements eg could there be a situation where the CCWG decides to split the funds into foundation #1, foundation #2 and foundation #3 (example only). This is what I would call a high level of disbursement
Sylvia Cadena 2:I have my hand raised
Erika Mann:Agree with Alan
Sylvia Cadena 2:Those will be recommendations, not disbursements. It will depend on what mechanisms are decided
Asha Hemrajani:Alan is spot on - we need to get the fundamental decisions out of the way first
Sylvia Cadena 2:Consistent or in line should be there. Not directly as stand there.
Erika Mann:We will do this
Erika Mann:Sylvia!!!
Alan Greenberg:If we are tied to directly support, that is a game changer in my mind
Asha Hemrajani:i got disconnected
Lyman Chapin (SSAC):@Asha What concerns me is the way in which the selection of members for the CCWG might be affected by the opportunity for the CCWG itself to direct the allocation of funds - even at a high level.
Asha Hemrajani:could I have a call out
Asha Hemrajani:please to +6566852483
RussMundy-SSAC:Perhaps it might be better to use the term "dispursement" for funding going to an "end party" and "allocation" for funds going into some "process", e.g., a foundation
Erika Mann:Asha - I took note about the comments Jonathan made when you were disconnected
Asha Hemrajani:Thanks Erika
Erika Mann:+ Russ
Asha Hemrajani:good point Russ
Sylvia Cadena 2:ok
Lyman Chapin (SSAC):@Russ That might work
Asha Hemrajani:ok back in again
Jonathan Robinson:@Russ. Thank-you. Helpful distinction to make between allocation / apportionment adn disbursement
Asha Hemrajani:I see your point Lyman
Asha Hemrajani:yes apportionment is a good way to describe it Jonathan
Asha Hemrajani:the guiding principles will have to come out from Sam's split into the categories
RussMundy-SSAC:Yes, I'm fine with this
Erika Mann:Russ, are you fine with this?
Asha Hemrajani:split of her document I mean
Sylvia Cadena 2:Agree with Jonathan, and apologies for being silence on email, but commit to sent comments by email on the document that Jonathan's shared
Erika Mann:Jonathan can you repeat your quesiton
Sylvia Cadena 2:Not me. Not to allocate.
Sylvia Cadena 2:It was an old hand, sorry.
Olga Cavalli:not me
Sylvia Cadena 2:No, the CWG should not be responsible for allocating funds
Erika Mann:Not me
Sylvia Cadena 2:That is not an allocation. That will be apportionment
Asha Hemrajani:No, I had not thought the CCWG would do the detailed level of disbursements, but I did envision that the CCWG could do some high level allocations
Erika Mann:Jonathan +1
RussMundy-SSAC:Jonathan +1
Sylvia Cadena 2:+1
Asha Hemrajani:very useful discussion indeed
Samantha Eisner:+1
Sylvia Cadena 2:Very useful, thank you all
Olga Cavalli:bye thanks!
RussMundy-SSAC:very good call
Sylvia Cadena 2:Bye thanks
RussMundy-SSAC:bye
Asha Hemrajani:Bye
Erika Mann:Thanks!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/dt-cwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20160505/cc4182bd/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Dt-cwg-auctionproceeds
mailing list