<html><body><span style="font-family:Book Antiqua; color:#000; font-size:10pt;">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>
<w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:DontAutofitConstrainedTables/>
<w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/>
</w:Compatibility>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="276">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><div style="font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;">
<style style="">
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Arial;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Times;
panose-1:2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;
mso-font-alt:"Times Roman";
mso-font-charset:77;
mso-generic-font-family:roman;
mso-font-format:other;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria;
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Avenir Book";
panose-1:2 0 5 3 2 0 0 2 0 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style></div>
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;">Good afternoon all,<o:p style=""></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;"> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;">I think it makes sense for me to elaborate on the
point I was trying to make about bullet point three of the high-level
agreements for Objections on today’s call.<o:p style=""></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;"> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><font face="book antiqua, palatino">“[</font><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 0);" mce_style="background-color: #ffff00;">Prior to the application round
commencing,</span><font face="book antiqua, palatino">] ICANN must publish, for each type of objection, all
supplemental rules as well as all criteria to be used by panelists for the
filing of, response to, and evaluation of each objection. Such guidance for
decision making by panelists must be more detailed than what was available
prior to the 2012 round. (High-Level Agreement C)”</font><span style="font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;" mce_style="font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;"><o:p style=""></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;"> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;">The point I was trying to illustrate is that the
Applicant Guidebook (AGB) needs to be the sole source of supplemental rules and
criteria for Objections. Whatever the AGB states is what the Objection
evaluators should use as guidance, and under no circumstance should ICANN org
or the service providers be permitted to reinterpret the AGB after applications
have been accepted, nor should either be able to publish additional
supplemental materials regarding Objections for any reason. <o:p style=""></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;"> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;">I think the portion highlighted in
yellow above helps close the loophole on the high-level agreement referenced. Without it, supplemental rules and criteria for Objections could
theoretically be accepted well after applications are accepted, as long as they
are published by ICANN.<o:p style=""></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;"> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;">On the call I was trying to illustrate how this
exact circumstance occurred in the 2012 round with respect to Community
Priority Evaluation (CPE). I was not intending to initiate a debate about CPE,
but rather highlight that in the 2012 round ICANN org permitted the service
providers to create supplemental documents for CPE long after applications were
accepted, introducing a controversial layer of unfairness and unpredictability that
I have raised in other parts of this working group. This included additional definitions of terms and interpretations of AGB language <span style="">previously left open for interpretation in the AGB. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;"><br></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;">I propose that no service
provider should be able to rewrite the language of the AGB for any reason, but
instead conclude and defend their decisions based on what the AGB says. This approach also makes room for applicants to defend their interpretation of the AGB. No applicants reasoned interpretation of ambiguous language and terms in the AGB should be grounds for penalty or rejection just because it does not align with any future or unfairly manufactured interpretation by the service provider.<o:p style=""></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;"> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;">Without diving into the claims of CPE unfairness,
I would like to think that the working group could align on the fact that
service providers (including Objection panelists) should not be given authority
to restate or redefine the language of the AGB, but instead work within the
language provided, even when vague or ambiguous.<o:p style=""></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;"> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;">My purpose for raising this point is to ensure that
no applicant – standard or community – is subjected to an arbitrary adjustment
to proceedings by ICANN org or the service providers once applications have
been accepted. Given that it did happen in CPE in the 2012 round, I believe
this working group must work to ensure no room is given for it to happen in
subsequent procedures for any activity involving service providers or otherwise. <o:p style=""></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;"> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;">Happy to discuss this further on the next call.<o:p style=""></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;"> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;">Thanks<o:p style=""></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;">Jamie<o:p style=""></o:p></div>
<!--EndFragment--><div style="font-family: "book antiqua", palatino;"><br style=""></div>
<blockquote id="replyBlockquote" webmail="1" style="font-family: verdana; border-left: 2px solid blue; margin-left: 8px; padding-left: 8px; font-size: 10pt; color: black;">
<div id="wmQuoteWrapper">
-------- Original Message --------<br>
Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Notes and Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent<br>
Procedures PDP WG - 16 September 2019<br>
From: Julie Hedlund <<a href="mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org">julie.hedlund@icann.org</a>><br>
Date: Mon, September 16, 2019 12:43 pm<br>
To: "<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a>><br>
<br>
<style>
#wmQuoteWrapper /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"MS Gothic"; panose-1:2 11 6 9 7 2 5 8 2 4;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @font-face {font-family:"\@MS Gothic"; panose-1:2 11 6 9 7 2 5 8 2 4;}
#wmQuoteWrapper /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, #wmQuoteWrapper li.MsoNormal, #wmQuoteWrapper div.MsoNormal {margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
#wmQuoteWrapper a:link, #wmQuoteWrapper span.MsoHyperlink {mso-style-priority:99; color:#0563C1; text-decoration:underline;}
#wmQuoteWrapper a:visited, #wmQuoteWrapper span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {mso-style-priority:99; color:#954F72; text-decoration:underline;}
#wmQuoteWrapper p.MsoPlainText, #wmQuoteWrapper li.MsoPlainText, #wmQuoteWrapper div.MsoPlainText {mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char"; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
#wmQuoteWrapper p.MsoListParagraph, #wmQuoteWrapper li.MsoListParagraph, #wmQuoteWrapper div.MsoListParagraph {mso-style-priority:34; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
#wmQuoteWrapper p.msonormal0, #wmQuoteWrapper li.msonormal0, #wmQuoteWrapper div.msonormal0 {mso-style-name:msonormal; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.PlainTextChar {mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char"; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-link:"Plain Text"; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle21 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle22 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle23 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle24 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle25 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle26 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle27 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle28 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle29 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle30 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle31 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle32 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle33 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle34 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle35 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle36 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle37 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle38 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle39 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle40 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.apple-converted-space {mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle42 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle43 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle44 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle45 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle46 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle47 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle48 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle49 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle50 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle51 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle52 {mso-style-type:personal-reply; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; font-size:10.0pt;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @page WordSection1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
#wmQuoteWrapper div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;}
</style> <div class="WordSection1"> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Dear Working Group members,<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"> <o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Please see below the notes from the meeting on 16 September 2019. <b><i>These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not a substitute for the recording, transcript, or the chat,</i></b> which will be posted at: <a target="_blank" href="https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2019-09-16+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Procedures+PDP"> https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2019-09-16+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Procedures+PDP</a>. <o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"> <o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Kind regards,<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Julie<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Julie Hedlund, Policy Director<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"> <o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><b>Notes and Action Items:</b><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><b> </b><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">1. Updates to Statements of Interest: No updates provided.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">2. Review of summary documents:<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">a. Name Collisions -- See: <a target="_blank" href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Q6_DxsCvSA_3B7ArncO2U4tWNY3vH7Wi4nINrouR4AI/edit?usp=sharing"> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Q6_DxsCvSA_3B7ArncO2U4tWNY3vH7Wi4nINrouR4AI/edit?usp=sharing</a>, page 55<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">Outstanding Items - New Ideas/Concerns/Divergence:<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- GNSO Council letter to the Board asking about dependencies with the NCAP report with respect to the new gTLD subsequent procedures.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- More Unknowns than knowns at this stage from the NCAP work. So we need to draw some lines in the sand for our work re: dependencies.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- The lack of high-level agreements so far reflect divisions in the community and in the WG that will make us default to 2012 implementation in most of the topics.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Some vendors have opted not to bid for the RFP for Study 1, but RFP is still open.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- In the comments, there is no consensus in deferring or not deferring to NCAP or SSAC.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- WG needs to plan for both circumstances: 1) NCAP is completed; 2) NCAP is not completed.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Question: how many languages/scripts are involved? Answer: name collisions are about strings in ASCII characters. Name collisions only happen "in the wire", meaning that only in ASCII, even though that could be the IDNA representation of an IDN string.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Question: Has any work been done on the RYSG ask for a look at the effectiveness of the previous mitigation measures? (sorry on mobile so slower reaction time)? Answer: Final report issued by the JAS advisors. Based on their data they do believe the previous mitigation measures have worked. <o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Zero mishaps perhaps because we don’t know if controlled interruption actually worked effectively to alert us.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- >From a evidence-driven PDP methodology, the only available data says 0.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">If NCAP work is not completed prior to the next application round, should the default be that the same name collision mitigation frameworks in place today be applied to those TLDs approved for the next round?<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Re: RySG comment, “No. ICANN should, at a minimum, release the studies its done on the names collision frameworks so that the community can judge if the same frameworks should be applied. If ICANN cannot do that, ICANN should conduct a prompt, formal study that quantifies and measures the efficacy of the previous controlled interruption framework should be conducted before modifying or replacing the system, without delaying the next round. Without these baseline measurements, assessing the risks of an alternative CI framework is not possible.” Question: Is there any evidence to the contrary since the JAS report? Answer: NCAP is looking to see if there was anything else.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- There is no evidence that controlled interruption worked as intended.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Only by asking all Internet users if it worked or not could there be evidence of it having worked 100%.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Hard to find evidence that may or may not be out there.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- An additional concern is that it wasn’t a vetted community driven design</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"MS Gothic"" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt; font-family: "MS Gothic";">
</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"MS Gothic"" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt; font-family: "MS Gothic";">
</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- But for all anybody knows, it worked. Despite some FUD on the other direction.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"MS Gothic"" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt; font-family: "MS Gothic";">
</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"MS Gothic"" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt; font-family: "MS Gothic";">
</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- It is another unknown as it is a risk assessment ratio risk. <o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- In response to Rubens…. Rubens part of the scope of Study 1 of NCAP to review the papers and results to come to an assessment - we should not be trying to do that now, as a pdp WG - NCAP will make an independent assessment as per its scope.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- In order to prove it worked, ICANN would have to make some representative strings not go through controlled interruption, and see what happened in that control group compared to the full slate.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"MS Gothic"" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt; font-family: "MS Gothic";">
</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- NCAP study 1 is just a collection of published material, with no conclusion to be made.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"MS Gothic"" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt; font-family: "MS Gothic";">
</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Suggestion to the final report: 2012 implementation (due to lack of consensus) + substantial refund + possibility of disabling CI on a per-string basis at ICANN Org request.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Good for the WG to acknowledge the findings of SAC90 and potentially agree with them with respect to collaboration.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">b. Objections -- See: <a target="_blank" href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BkRn9nYeBNjyx2mTw-3nIDn22jTumWd4w1PZR-KNrPs/edit?usp=sharing"> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BkRn9nYeBNjyx2mTw-3nIDn22jTumWd4w1PZR-KNrPs/edit?usp=sharing</a>, page 2<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">High-Level Agreements:<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">Re: ICANN must publish, for each type of objection, all supplemental rules as well as all criteria to be used by panelists for the filing of, response to, and evaluation of each objection. Such guidance for decision making by panelists must be more detailed than what was available prior to the 2012 round. (High-Level Agreement C) <o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Could the WG include a recommendation this should be done prior to accepting any applications? For those who were part of the community applications, there were supplemental rules created after applications were submitted and after objections. If there are going to be supplemental rules they need to be published prior to applications being submitted.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Seems like the first three bullets could be very costly, depending on how implemented.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Don’t think the WG is asking for new rules, just for transparency in supplemental rules and in selecting panelists.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- So there does need to be a balance between transparency and flexibility. There will be some unknowns prior to the applications being submitted.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Basically anything that is meant to apply to objection procedures must be made available upfront.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Should we carve out community applications, versus community objections?<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Those that filed/responded to LPI and other objections would liekly agree with increased transparency.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Community objections were also used by community applications to try resolving their contention sets, not only by standard applications against declared as community applications.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Do we need to make a There appears to be a concern about the latter being developed on the fly.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- The point is not about CPE here, but rather about how supplemental documents for CPE were published years after ICANN accepted community applications. Unless we are clear in subsequent procedures about supplemental materials not being permitted for objections, then we don’t have any way of preventing them from doing so.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Important to know costs ahead of time.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Basically anything that is intended to apply to objection procedures must be made available upfront.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Can we separate CPE into a separate category of objections?</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"MS Gothic"" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt; font-family: "MS Gothic";">
</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">Community Objections are a different discussion.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- Perhaps providing a list of the changed elements would assist the group in understanding the issues you are presenting.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"MS Gothic"" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt; font-family: "MS Gothic";">
</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;">-- CPE is part of string contention resolution.<o:p></o:p></span></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" mce_style="font-size: 12.0pt;"></span><o:p></o:p></div> </div> <hr>_______________________________________________<br>
Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org">Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
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 href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a 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.
</div>
</blockquote></span></body></html>