<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>+1. Tx All for interesting meetings in Montreal!</p>
<p>Kathy<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/13/2019 2:08 PM, Aikman-Scalese,
Anne wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:2274397f5c8743f1921b0925bcd1bcec@lrrc.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]-->
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@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:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.gmaildefault
{mso-style-name:gmail_default;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
color:#1F497D;}
.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;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:358311897;
mso-list-template-ids:-1725900694;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:1225412212;
mso-list-template-ids:-399053034;}
@list l2
{mso-list-id:1296720863;
mso-list-template-ids:1433323736;}
@list l2:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l2:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l2:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l2:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l2:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l2:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l2:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l2:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l2:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l3
{mso-list-id:1388336055;
mso-list-template-ids:-1339134462;}
@list l3:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l3:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l3:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l3:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l3:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l3:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l3:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l3:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l3:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l4
{mso-list-id:1518885526;
mso-list-template-ids:-315706250;}
@list l4:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l4:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l4:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l4:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l4:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l4:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l4:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l4:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l4:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l5
{mso-list-id:1828983815;
mso-list-template-ids:738997486;}
@list l5:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l5:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l5:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l5:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l5:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l5:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l5:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l5:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l5:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l6
{mso-list-id:1914512604;
mso-list-template-ids:1882065580;}
@list l6:level1
{mso-level-start-at:2;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">HI Jeff et al,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">I think we will
need a redlined version of the CPE Guidelines in order to
send that out for public comment. (We have noted a few
changes are required, e.g. the reference to the community
having existed since 2007.) In the context of appeals, I am
still very concerned about the use of the word
“considerable” in CPE evaluations. I don’t know any way for
an appeals panel to objectively judge the word
“considerable” in relation to a standard for overturning the
first panel’s decision.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Anne<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
Gnso-newgtld-wg <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org"><gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org></a>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Justine Chew<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, October 27, 2019 7:19 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Jeff Neuman <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com"><jeff.neuman@comlaude.com></a>;
Jamie Baxter <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jamie@dotgay.com"><jamie@dotgay.com></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] CPE: Supplementary
Guidelines 4-B: Opposition<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">[EXTERNAL]</span></strong><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"
align="center"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">
<hr width="100%" size="2" align="center">
</span></div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">Thanks,
Jeff, for this.<br>
<br>
First, I largely support what Jamie has set out in his
email in respect of 4-B Opposition, and your
conclusion at the top of your email.<br>
<br>
Second, I appreciate that it's been mentioned and
generally received support, I just wanted to reiterate
that selection of the next CPE provider - in terms of
community input into the RFP process - would be
crucial. <br>
<br>
<b>Third, I wanted to clarify -- for implementation,
what additional guidance should (or could) be
provided to draw clearer distinction between
opposition (i.e. opposite to community endorsement)
and objection? </b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<span class="gmaildefault"><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">Thanks,</span></span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><br>
<br>
Justine </span><br>
-----<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 at 05:04, Jeff
Neuman <<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC
1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">This
one we discussed on the call extensively and I think
we already discussed making sure that the there be a
balance of support and opposition. If an Applicant
demonstrates support from the community and earns
full credit on Support, then the opposition MUST be
substantial in order get points taken off. One
letter from one individual or group should not
necessarily be enough to lose a point (unless that
group is substantial in terms of representing the
community).<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Here
is what the FTI Group states on Opposition.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><u>Sub-Criterion
4-B: Opposition</u>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">To
receive two points for Opposition, an application
must have no opposition of relevance.<sup>197</sup>
To receive one point, an application may have
relevant opposition from no more than one group of
non-negligible size.<sup>198</sup> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Nine
CPE reports recorded one point for Opposition.<sup>199</sup>
In each instance, the CPE Provider determined that
the underlying applications received relevant
opposition from no more than one group of
non-negligible size. Opposition was deemed relevant
on several grounds: (i) opposition was from a
community not identified in the application but had
an association to the applied-for string;<sup>200</sup>
(ii) the application was subject to a legal rights
objection (LRO);<sup>201</sup> or (iii) opposition
was not made for any reason forbidden by the
Applicant Guidebook, such as competition or
obstruction.<sup>202</sup><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><sup> </sup><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Seventeen
CPE reports recorded the full two points for
Opposition.<sup>203</sup> The CPE Provider
determined that the applications corresponding to 17
CPE reports did not have any letters of relevant
opposition.<sup>204</sup> Ultimately, FTI observed
that the CPE Provider engaged in a consistent
evaluation process that strictly adhered to the
criteria and requirements set forth in the Applicant
Guidebook and CPE Guidelines. FTI observed no
instances where the CPE Provider's evaluation
process deviated from the applicable guidelines
pertaining to the Community Endorsement criterion.
Based on FTI's investigation, FTI concludes that the
CPE Provider consistently applied the Community
Endorsement criterion in all CPEs. While the CPE
Provider awarded different scores to different
applications, the scoring decisions were based on
the same rationale, namely a failure to satisfy the
requirements that are set forth in the Applicant
Guidebook and CPE Guidelines.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><sup>197</sup>
Id. at Pg. 4-17.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><sup>198</sup>
Id.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><sup>199</sup>
MERCK (KGaA) CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/merck/merck-cpe-1-980-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/merck/merck-cpe-1-980-</a>
7217-en.pdf); MERCK (RH) CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/merck/merck-cpe-1-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/merck/merck-cpe-1-</a>
1702-73085-en.pdf); SHOP (Commercial Connect) CPE
Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/shop/shop-cpe-1-1830-1672-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/shop/shop-cpe-1-1830-1672-en.pdf</a>);
GAY CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/gay/gay-cpe-1-1713-23699-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/gay/gay-cpe-1-1713-23699-en.pdf</a>);
GAY 2 CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/gay/gay-cpe-rr-1-1713-23699-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/gay/gay-cpe-rr-1-1713-23699-en.pdf</a>);
LLP CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/llp/llp-cpe-1-880-35508-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/llp/llp-cpe-1-880-35508-en.pdf</a>);
LLC CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/llc/llc-cpe-1-880-17627-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/llc/llc-cpe-1-880-17627-en.pdf</a>);
INC CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/inc/inc-cpe-1-880-35979-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/inc/inc-cpe-1-880-35979-en.pdf</a>);
and MUSIC (.music LLC) CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/music/music-cpe-1-959-51046-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/music/music-cpe-1-959-51046-en.pdf</a>).
No CPE reports recorded zero points for Opposition.
200 LLP CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/llp/llp-cpe-1-880-35508-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/llp/llp-cpe-1-880-35508-en.pdf</a>);
LLC CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/llc/llc-cpe-1-880-17627-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/llc/llc-cpe-1-880-17627-en.pdf</a>);
and INC CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/inc/inc-cpe-1-880-35979-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/inc/inc-cpe-1-880-35979-en.pdf</a>).
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><sup>201</sup>
MERCK (KGaA) CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/merck/merck-cpe-1-980-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/merck/merck-cpe-1-980-</a>
7217-en.pdf); and MERCK (RH) CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/merck/merckcpe-1-1702-73085-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/merck/merckcpe-1-1702-73085-en.pdf</a>).
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><sup>202</sup>
GAY CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/gay/gay-cpe-1-1713-23699-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/gay/gay-cpe-1-1713-23699-en.pdf</a>);
GAY 2 CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/gay/gay-cpe-rr-1-1713-23699-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/gay/gay-cpe-rr-1-1713-23699-en.pdf</a>);
SHOP (Commercial Connect) CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/shop/shop-cpe-1-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/shop/shop-cpe-1-</a>
1830-1672-en.pdf); and MUSIC (.music LLC) CPE Report
(<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/music/music-cpe-1-959-51046-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/music/music-cpe-1-959-51046-en.pdf</a>).
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><sup>203</sup>
ART (eflux) CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/art/art-cpe-1-1675-51302-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/art/art-cpe-1-1675-51302-</a>
en.pdf); MUSIC (DotMusic Ltd.) CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/music/musiccpe-1-1115-14110-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/music/musiccpe-1-1115-14110-en.pdf</a>);
ECO CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/eco/eco-cpe-1-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/eco/eco-cpe-1-</a>
912-59314-en.pdf); HOTEL CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/hotel/hotel-cpe-1-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/hotel/hotel-cpe-1-</a>
1032-95136-en.pdf); OSAKA CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/osaka/osaka-cpe1-901-9391-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/osaka/osaka-cpe1-901-9391-en.pdf</a>);
SPA CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/spa/spa-cpe-1-1309-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/spa/spa-cpe-1-1309-</a>
81322-en.pdf); RADIO CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/radio/radio-cpe-1-1083-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/radio/radio-cpe-1-1083-</a>
39123-en.pdf). TENNIS CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/tennis/tennis-cpe-1-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/tennis/tennis-cpe-1-</a>
1723-69677-en.pdf); MLS CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/mls/mls-cpe-1-1888-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/mls/mls-cpe-1-1888-</a>
47714-en.pdf); CPA (USA) CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/cpa/cpa-cpe-1-1911-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/cpa/cpa-cpe-1-1911-</a>
56672-en.pdf); CPA (AU) CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/cpa/cpa-cpe-1-1744-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/cpa/cpa-cpe-1-1744-</a>
1971-en.pdf); GMBH CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/gmbh/gmbh-cpe-1-1273-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/gmbh/gmbh-cpe-1-1273-</a>
63351-en.pdf); IMMO CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/immo/immo-cpe-1-1000-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/immo/immo-cpe-1-1000-</a>
62742-en.pdf); SHOP (GMO) CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/shop/shop-cpe-1-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/shop/shop-cpe-1-</a>
890-52063-en.pdf); KIDS CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/kids/kids-cpe-1-1309-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/kids/kids-cpe-1-1309-</a>
46695-en.pdf); TAXI CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/taxi/taxi-cpe-1-1025-"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/taxi/taxi-cpe-1-1025-</a>
18840-en.pdf); and ART (Dadotart) CPE Report (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/art/art-cpe1-1097-20833-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/art/art-cpe1-1097-20833-en.pdf</a>).
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><sup>204</sup>
Id.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-GB">Jeff Neuman</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-GB">Senior Vice President </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-GB">Com Laude | Valideus</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-GB">D: +1.703.635.7514</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-GB">E:
</span><u><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0563C1"
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a></span></u><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b>From:</b>
Jamie Baxter <<a
href="mailto:jamie@dotgay.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">jamie@dotgay.com</a>>
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, October 11, 2019 12:41 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Jeff Neuman <<a
href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a>>;
'Emily Barabas' <<a
href="mailto:emily.barabas@icann.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">emily.barabas@icann.org</a>>;
<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Community
Priority Evaluations Review of Supplementary
Guidelines<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">Good afternoon Working
Group members</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">On the last call regarding
Community Applications, everyone was asked to
review the EIU’s CPE Guidelines to see if there
are any items that need further scrutiny before
being added into the AGB for subsequent
procedures. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">My apologies for the
length of this response, but hopefully these notes
help provide insight on how the AGB language was
interpreted from a Community Applicant
perspective, and what things continue to need
further clarification before the next AGB is
published.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">1-A Delineation</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">Page 4: “Delineation”</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">The non-exhaustive list
the EIU added into the CPE guidelines that denotes
elements of straight-forward member definitions
contains a clear bias towards professional and
trade communities. The AGB did not carry this kind
of bias, and it would be a concern if the next AGB
projected this kind of bias around delineation,
especially since many linguistic and cultural
communities are straight-forward in the eyes of
their members but do not use a membership card
system. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">Can review be done to
determine what other forms of delineation were
accepted in CPE scoring from all community
applications in the 2012 round? And can those
examples be included in the examples already noted
by the EIU? </span>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">2-A Nexus</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">“Identify”</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">The AGB very clearly
states that “”identify” means that the applied for
string closely describes the community
<u>or</u> the community members,” providing two
distinct paths to establish if an applied for
string identifies the community. These paths are
not interconnected or contingent on one another in
the AGB, but instead suggest separate routes to
establishing nexus.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">My interpretation of this
AGB language is that an applicant can select a
string that is a known identifier of the
community, or a string that identifies the
specific members of that community. Additionally,
no rule is placed on the “known identifier of the
community” as needing to be the only identifier of
that community.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">The AGB additionally
provides two examples to help illustrate the
definition of “identity” for each of the possible
paths.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<ol start="1" type="1">
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l0
level1 lfo1">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt">As an example, a
string could qualify for a score of 2 if it is a
noun that the typical community member would
naturally be called in the context. (AGB, Pg
197)</span><o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l0
level1 lfo1">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt">If the string
appears excessively broad (such as, for example,
a globally well-known but local tennis club
applying for “.TENNIS”) then it would not
qualify for a 2. (AGB, Pg 197)</span><o:p></o:p></li>
</ol>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">What the AGB does not do
with these examples is suggest that both paths
must be successfully maneuvered in order to
achieve 2 points. The definition of “identify” in
the AGB suggests the applicant had the choice to
design their application around a name of the
community (TENNIS community), or the member
attributes in the community (TENNIS players,
TENNIS coaches, etc).</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">This is clearly noted in
example 1 where 2 points were achieved when it’s
confirmed the string identifies the actual
community members. The second example denying 2
points for .TENNIS however does not further
elaborate on how 2 points could have been achieved
in the case of describing the TENNIS community.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">The second example could
suggest that if an internationally recognized
tennis club applied for .TENNIS instead of a local
tennis club, for use among those in the wider
TENNIS community (broadcasters, networks, physical
therapists, vendors, fans, etc – all tertiary
parts of the community that also have other
identifiers), then it could have been successful
on the path of “closely describes the community.”
When the average person thinks of the TENNIS
community they could reasonably include the list
above, yet these participants in the TENNIS
community may not identify naturally with the word
TENNIS (i.e. a tennis broadcaster that also covers
football).</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">Although the EIU’s CPE
guidelines are silent on establishing further
clarity around the AGB language related to the two
paths to “identify,” the practice of the EIU did
not align with the flexibility of the AGB. The EIU
appears to have conflated the two distinct paths
as one and made them both requirements under the
definition of “identity,” or at least imposed the
requirement that the string be a term the
community members naturally call themselves. This
may have happened because the two examples
outlined above run sequentially in the AGB,
causing confusion without distinction.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">Given the unfortunate
implementation route taken by the EIU, it should
be more clear in the AGB what is meant by
“identify means that the applied for string
closely describes the community <u>or</u> the
community members.” I believe it offers two
separate paths to success for community
applicants, one based on a widely used and
identifiable name of the community (known by those
inside & outside the community) and the other
based on the identity of the actual members in the
community.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">4-B Opposition</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">“Relevance”
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">As discussed on the last
call, guidance for “relevance” in 4-B must include
a balance of opposition in relation to documented
support, and not just an isolated determination of
whether the opposing entity is part of the
community explicitly or implicitly addressed. One
misaligned community member/entity should not have
the power to impact CPE scores of a largely
aligned community, yet that was the EIU’s
interpretation and practice in the 2012 round. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">To illustrate this point,
if an applicant has hundreds of organizations from
around the world supporting an application, and
those endorsements represent the voices of tens of
thousands of other local and regional
organizations, then an expression of opposition
from one single, small and even locally based
organization from within the defined community
among the thousands globally expressing support
should not be able to put 1 of the 2 CPE points
for this criteria in jeopardy.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">Cheers</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt">Jamie</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D">Jamie Baxter</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D">dotgay LLC</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D"><a
href="mailto:jamie@dotgay.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">jamie@dotgay.com</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D"><a
href="http://www.dotgay.com/" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">www.dotgay.com</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D">A Certified
LGBT Business Enterprise (LGBTBE)</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D">Please join
us on Facebook at
<a href="http://www.facebook.dotgay.com/"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.facebook.dotgay.com</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D">and follow
us at
<a href="http://www.twitter.com/dotgay"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.twitter.com/dotgay</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">
Gnso-newgtld-wg [<a
href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Jeff Neuman<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, October 10, 2019 2:54
PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Emily Barabas; <a
href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Community
Priority Evaluations Review of Supplementary
Guidelines</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">All,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I
would hope that everyone reads all of the notes sent
out on each of the meetings carefully, but just in
case, I want to draw your attention to one of the
biggest action items that arose as a result of our
call this morning (Wednesday night for those in the
US). In addition, I would like to pose a question
for consideration by the Working Group.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<ol start="1" type="1">
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1
level1 lfo2;vertical-align:baseline">
“ACTION ITEM:<b> </b>WG members will go through
the guidelines and flag anything they think should
not be incorporated into the AGB for subsequent
procedures. See guidelines at:
<a
href="https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/cpe/guidelines-27sep13-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
<span style="color:#1155CC;background:white">https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/cpe/guidelines-27sep13-en.pdf</span></a>”<o:p></o:p></li>
</ol>
<p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span
style="color:black"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span
style="color:black">One of the universal
criticisms about the CPE process was that there
were additional rules and guidelines that were
adopted by the CPE Evaluators (EIU) after all of
the applications were submitted. The Working
Group will most likely be recommending that all
rules be set forth in the Applicant Guidebook or
at the very latest prior to the Application Window
opening up. That message has been delivered loud
and clear.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="color:black"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span
style="color:black">Something that can help,
however, would be if the Working Group could
review the CPE Guidelines that were developed by
EIU (at the link above) to see if those Guidelines
make sense and whether those Guidelines or
something similar to those Guidelines could be
formally adopted as part of our recommendations.
Putting aside the fact that these came after
applications were submitted, many of the
Guidelines make sense. If we formally approve
them, then this will go a long way to helping
potential applicants understand how CPE
evaluations will work.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span
style="color:black"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<ol start="2" type="1">
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l6
level1 lfo3;vertical-align:baseline">
<u>Clarifying Questions and CPE:</u> A second
item which looks likely to be a recommendation
will be that CPE Evaluators should utilize the CQ
process (Clarification Questions process) to seek
clarifications (but not new material) from the
applicant on items where it has questions or
issues. However, would it also be advisable for
the CPE Evaluators to be able to send CQs to those
that oppose a community application (and that have
submitted letters of opposition)? In other words,
CPE Evaluators can ask those that oppose the
application questions about themselves and how
representative they are. They can drill down on
details about what it is that they oppose, etc.
<b>Those on the call thought this may be a good
idea to help weed out frivolous letters of
opposition or also emphasize the opposition of
real entities, persons and communities.
</b><o:p></o:p></li>
</ol>
<p
style="margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span
style="color:black"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p
style="margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span
style="color:black">We believe these should be
non-controversial, but would like to input other
than that which we got on the call.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p
style="margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span
style="color:black"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p
style="margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span
style="color:black">Best regards,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-GB">Jeff Neuman</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-GB">Senior Vice President </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-GB">Com Laude | Valideus</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-GB">D: +1.703.635.7514</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"
lang="EN-GB">E:
</span><u><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0563C1"
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a></span></u><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b>From:</b>
Gnso-newgtld-wg <<a
href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Emily Barabas<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, October 10, 2019 7:16 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a
href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Notes and
Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
PDP WG - 10 October 2019<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Dear
Working Group members,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Please
see below the notes from the meeting on 10 October
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
href="https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2019-10-10+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Procedures+PDP"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2019-10-10+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Procedures+PDP</a>.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">On
the call, it was suggested that guidelines used by
CPE evaluators in the 2012 round should be
incorporated into the Applicant Guidebook in
subsequent procedures to improve predictability.
Please see the notes below for details. As a follow
up to the action item below, WG members are
encouraged to review the 2012 CPE guidelines (<span
style="color:black;background:white"><a
href="https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/cpe/guidelines-27sep13-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/cpe/guidelines-27sep13-en.pdf</a></span><span
style="color:black">) and raise on the mailing
list if there are elements of the guidelines that
they believe
<u>should not</u> be incorporated into the AGB.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Kind
regards,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Emily<o:p></o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext
1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b>Notes
and Action Items:</b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b> </b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b>Action
Item:
</b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p
style="margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;vertical-align:baseline"><b><span
style="color:black"> </span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p
style="margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span
style="color:black">ACTION ITEM:<b>
</b>WG members will go through the guidelines and
flag anything they think should not be
incorporated into the AGB for subsequent
procedures. See guidelines at:
<a
href="https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/cpe/guidelines-27sep13-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
<span style="color:#1155CC;background:white">https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/cpe/guidelines-27sep13-en.pdf</span></a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><b><span
style="color:black">Notes:</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span
style="color:black">1. Welcome and Update to
Statements of Interest </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<ul type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l2
level1 lfo4;vertical-align:baseline">
No SOI updates<o:p></o:p></li>
</ul>
<ul type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l4
level1 lfo5;vertical-align:baseline">
Following up on Monday’s call, there is a revised
chart available on appeals. Please add questions
and comments to the draft for discussion on the
email list. The chart is available at:
<a
href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R4eU7C-HI5ikF5RtVhp5JRXKVVRn6R8WX8fIU0IOwu8/edit?usp=sharing"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R4eU7C-HI5ikF5RtVhp5JRXKVVRn6R8WX8fIU0IOwu8/edit?usp=sharing</a><o:p></o:p></li>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span
style="color:black">2.a. Community Applications</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<ul type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Policy Goals are high-level and non-controversial.
High-Level agreements so far: The Community
Priority Evaluation (CPE) process must be more
transparent and predictable; All evaluation
procedures should be developed BEFORE the
application process opens and made easily and
readily available.<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
CCT-RT Recommendation 34 also suggests making
improvements to address concerns raised about
community applications before going forward with
subsequent procedures.<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Guidelines developed by the evaluators have not
been discussed in depth by this group, other than
the fact that they were made available late in the
process. Key point raised in the public comments
-- information contained in the guidelines needs
to be available to applicants before applications
are submitted. <o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Would it make sense to put some of the guidelines
developed by the evaluators into the Applicant
Guidebook?<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Were there things in the guidelines, other than
those detailed in the public comments, which were
problematic?<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
<b>ACTION ITEM: </b>WG members will go through
the guidelines and flag anything they think should
not be incorporated into the AGB for subsequent
procedures. See guidelines at:
<a
href="https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/cpe/guidelines-27sep13-en.pdf"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
<span style="color:#1155CC;background:white">https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/cpe/guidelines-27sep13-en.pdf</span></a><o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
By including guidelines in the AGB, there would be
greater predictability for applicants and also
greater clarity for future evaluators.<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
As a community applicant, there was a lot left
open for interpretation in the 2012 AGB. As a
result, an applicant’s interpretation of the
guidebook may have been different from what the
evaluators took away when they developed their
guidelines. This resulted in a discrepancy that
should not exist in subsequent procedures.<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Review of suggestions in the public comments on
improving transparency and predictability of the
CPE process. <o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Review of comments on the definition of
community. <o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
One WG member disagrees with the way the EIU
further restricted the definition of community in
its guidelines, and suggests that this is not
incorporated into the AGB going forward.
Specifically, the EIU prioritized those that had a
structured system to the community --
institutionalized or industry-related
organizations would therefore be higher priority.<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Suggestion - what if ICANN community members
served as CPE panelists? They might better
understand the definition of community from the
ICANN perspective. ALAC advised in their public
comments that members of grassroots organizations
should serve as panelists.<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Response - Different members of the ICANN
community might understand the definition
differently. ICANN never provided a clear
definition. ICANN was relying on the scoring to
delineate who should get priority rather than
having a specific definition. <o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
In selecting an entity to do the evaluations,
ICANN was looking for expertise in doing this type
of evaluation with independence, but as a result
the evaluators may not have as much perspective on
what ICANN was trying to achieve. Members of the
ICANN community come in with their own biases.
Could community members perhaps have some kind of
advisory role instead? <o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
The choice of evaluators may have impacted the way
they approached the evaluation process. EIU has an
economic focus. <o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Further review of suggestions for improving
transparency and predictability of the CPE process
in relation to the preliminary recommendation that
the CPE process must be more transparent and
predictable.<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Conflict of interest provisions discussed
previously should be applicable to all panelists,
including those conducting CPE. This will address
public comments that raised concerns about
conflict of interest.<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Comment - it is very important that one
“naysayer” does not prevent an application from
moving forward. There needs to be substantial
opposition. <o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Suggestion for <span style="background:white">an
additional WG Recommendation: If there was
research relied on for the decision it should be
cited and a link to the information provided.
This is based on comments from Jaime Baxter,
ALAC, and NCSG.</span><o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="background:white">Some have commented
that the costs of the process should be lower
and that the process should be quicker.
Suggestion for an implementation note stating
ICANN staff should examine ways to make the
process more efficient in terms of cost and
timing. It may be difficult to be more detailed
since ICANN Org is in the best position to
evaluate how to increase efficiencies. </span><o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="background:white">Comment - At this
stage, ICANN Org should be better able to scope
the task with a service provider and set clear
expectations. The service provider should be
responsible for remaining within budget. </span><o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="background:white">Review of public
comments on </span>preliminary recommendation:
CPE evaluations should be completed in a shorter
period of time.<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Review of public comments on preliminary
recommendation: All evaluation procedures should
be developed BEFORE the application process opens
and made easily and readily available.<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Review of public comments on preliminary
recommendation: The CPE process should include a
process for evaluators to ask clarifying questions
and where appropriate engage in a dialogue with
the applicant [and providers of letters of
opposition?] during the CPE process. ICANN org
raised concerns about potential lobbying and lack
of transparency that could result from this type
of engagement. Perhaps panelists could ask
clarifying questions in written format --- all
materials would be publicly available. The
opportunity would be equally available to all
parties to ensure that the process is fair. <o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Preliminary Recommendation about dialogue between
evaluators and relevant parties will be revised
and included as a draft recommendation for the WG
to consider further.<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
One WG member stated that community applicants
can’t change their application, and that the
opportunity for dialogue won’t change the
application. It simply provides an opportunity for
the applicant to illustrate key points so that the
evaluators understand the application. There is
little room for lobbying from this perspective. <o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Response -- by putting everything in writing,
there is still this opportunity to clarify, and
there is greater transparency.<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Additional question - should the panelists be able
to send clarification questions to those filing
opposition letters? One member expressed support
for this proposal. It may help to bring greater
clarity to understanding the legitimacy of the
opposition. It’s important to be clear that this
is not about community-based objections but about
opposition to community-based applications.<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Review of public comments on preliminary
recommendation: Less restrictive word count for
communities to engage in clarifying and providing
information. ALAC expressed opposition to this
recommendation. <o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
It may be helpful to do some additional research
on the existing word count restrictions, but there
did not seem to be much support for increasing
limits on word count.<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Review of ALAC comment on <span
style="background:white">providing access to
experts to assist communities, particularly
those from underserved regions in preparing
applications in order to level the playing
field. Suggestion to link this comment to the
topic Applicant Support. </span><o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Review of comments on potentially providing
alternative benefits if an applicant scored below
the threshold.<o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="background:white">Review of suggested
changes to evaluation criteria or weight/scoring
of criteria -- in particular, discussion of the
comment that if opposition is expressed, it must
be examined in the big picture and weighed
against the volume of support. There should be a
balance.</span><o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="background:white">Discussion of
suggestion in the public comments that there
should be addition criteria around benefit to
registrants -- perhaps there could be a form of
“extra credit” granted to applicants that help
or solve a problem inside a community. This
could come in the form of bonus points. It might
address some of the public comments from the
Council of Europe, as well. </span><o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="background:white">Clarification -
this is already a requirement of the
application, however it was not translated into
the scoring criteria. It was incorporated into
the contract as a commitment to the community.
It would make sense for this to part of the
scoring criteria.</span><o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="background:white">Review of comments
on whether there should continue to be
preferential treatment for community
applications -- there is general support for
this concept. NCSG expressed concern about the
definition of community. Registrars would like
to eliminate the concept of community.</span><o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="background:white">Review of comments
on the Council of Europe report. </span><o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="background:white">Review of comments
</span>in response to the question - to what
extent should evaluators be able to deviate from
pre-published guidance and guidelines? <o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Additional comment raised by a WG member -- any
requirements about letters of support should be
clear and transparent up front. <o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
Review of additional <span
style="background:white">considerations on
selection of panelists and program goals raised
by the Council of Europe. </span><o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3
level1 lfo6;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="background:white">Note that ICANN is
currently examining the concept of Global Public
Interest which may be responsive to the Council
of Europe’s comments on this topic.</span><o:p></o:p></li>
</ul>
<p style="margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span
style="color:black;background:white">3. AOB</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<ul type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l5
level1 lfo7;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="background:white">None.</span><o:p></o:p></li>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"
align="center">
<hr width="100%" size="1" align="center">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The
contents of this email and any attachments are
confidential to the intended recipient. They may not
be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone
other than the intended recipient. If you have
received this message in error, please return it to
the sender (deleting the body of the email and
attachments in your reply) and immediately and
permanently delete it. Please note that the Com
Laude Group does not accept any responsibility for
viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or
otherwise check this email and any attachments. The
Com Laude Group does not accept liability for
statements which are clearly the sender's own and
not made on behalf of the group or one of its member
entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ
Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in
England and Wales with company number 5047655 and
registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street,
London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a
company registered in England and Wales with company
number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30
Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England;
Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with
company number SC197176, having its registered
office at 33 Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian,
EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA
and Valideus USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle
Drive, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude
(Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan
having its registered office at Suite 319,1-3-21
Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For
further information see <a
href="https://comlaude.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">
www.comlaude.com</a> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div
id="m_-763459337920493354gmail-m_-205270715448930096DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable"
style="border:none;border-top:solid #D3D4DE 1.0pt"
cellspacing="4" cellpadding="0" border="1">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td
style="width:41.25pt;border:none;padding:9.75pt
.75pt .75pt .75pt" width="61">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><a
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none"><o:p></o:p></span></a></p>
<br>
</td>
<td
style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:9.0pt
.75pt .75pt .75pt" width="476">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;line-height:13.5pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#41424E"><a
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:#41424E;text-decoration:none">Virus-free.
<u><span style="color:#4453EA">www.avast.com</span></u>
</span><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times
New
Roman",serif;color:windowtext;text-decoration:none"><o:p></o:p></span></a></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><a
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none"> <o:p></o:p></span></a></p>
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"
align="center"><a
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">
<hr width="100%" size="2" align="center">
</span></a></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">The
contents of this email and any attachments are
confidential to the intended recipient. They may
not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by
anyone other than the intended recipient. If you
have received this message in error, please return
it to the sender (deleting the body of the email
and attachments in your reply) and immediately and
permanently delete it. Please note that the Com
Laude Group does not accept any responsibility for
viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or
otherwise check this email and any attachments.
The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for
statements which are clearly the sender's own and
not made on behalf of the group or one of its
member entities. The Com Laude Group includes
Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered
in England and Wales with company number 5047655
and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell
Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus
Limited, a company registered in England and Wales
with company number 06181291 and registered office
at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN
England; Demys Limited, a company registered in
Scotland with company number SC197176, having its
registered office at 33 Melville Street,
Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum,
Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA,
headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600,
McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan)
Corporation, a company registered in Japan having
its registered office at Suite 319,1-3-21
Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For
further information see
<u><span style="color:blue">www.comlaude.com</span></u>
<o:p></o:p></span></a></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a
href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">_______________________________________________<br>
Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list<br>
<u><span style="color:blue">Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</span></u><br>
<u><span style="color:blue">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg</span></u><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 (<u><span style="color:blue">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</span></u>)
and the website Terms of Service (<u><span
style="color:blue">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</span></u>).
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.<o:p></o:p></span></a></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<hr>
<font size="1" face="Arial" color="Gray"><br>
This message and any attachments are intended only for the use
of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the
reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended
recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering
the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying
of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this communication in error, please notify us
immediately by replying to the sender. The information
transmitted in this message and any attachments may be
privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential
use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.
<br>
</font>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org">Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg</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>