<div dir="ltr">I support the intent of this change; the suggestion to migrate the threshold to prevail to a percentage instead of a number per se is a good one.<br><br>Thanks,<br>Justine</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 at 02:24, Jamie Baxter <<a href="mailto:jbaxter@spimarketing.com">jbaxter@spimarketing.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" style="overflow-wrap: break-word;">
<div class="gmail-m_7594192601191237584WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Muli">Hey Jeff and Cheryl<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Muli"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Muli">I welcome and support the proposal of adjusting the scoring threshold to a percentage (75-80) of total evaluation scoring.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Muli"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Muli">This sounds completely in alignment with overall efforts to prioritize communities in the new gTLD program and this score threshold sounds much more realistic and reasonable as a scoring threshold
for community applicants.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Muli"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Muli">Jamie Baxter<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Muli"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(181,196,223);padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">From: </span></b><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Gnso-newgtld-wg <<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of Jeff Neuman <<a href="mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com" target="_blank">jeff@jjnsolutions.com</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Monday, December 14, 2020 at 9:33 AM<br>
<b>To: </b>"<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>[Gnso-newgtld-wg] 10th and (hopefully) Final Topical E-mail - Community Scoring<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif">This is the
<u>Tenth Topical E-mail</u> on outstanding questions being “put to the list.” This covers the question of overall scoring to pass CPE (Topic 34)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Remember: We are down to the wire on this, so unless you have a VERY strong objection to these, we will put these into the document. If you do have a big issue with the responses
to these (all of which were previously discussed and in emails over the past 1.5 months), please let us know ASAP. Only comments that provide the rationale for the objection with proposed replacement text to address the specific outstanding questions will
now be considered.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:red">Let’s not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="gmail-m_7594192601191237584MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0.75in">
<u></u><span>I.<span style="font:7pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span><u></u><u>Current Applicant Guidebook Language:</u> “An application must score at least 14 points to prevail in a community priority evaluation.”<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="gmail-m_7594192601191237584MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0.75in"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="gmail-m_7594192601191237584MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0.75in">
<u></u><span>II.<span style="font:7pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span><u></u><u>Issue</u>: Some commenters to the Draft Final Report, including the ALAC, Infonetworks, Swiss Government, fTLD Registry Services supported lowering the threshold from 14 out of 16 points (approx. 88%) to 12 out of 16 points (75%).
However, it should be noted that during our discussions, not everyone supported the lowering of the threshold.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="gmail-m_7594192601191237584MsoListParagraph"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="gmail-m_7594192601191237584MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0.75in">
<u></u><span>III.<span style="font:7pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span><u></u><u>Discussion Points</u><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="gmail-m_7594192601191237584MsoListParagraph"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0in" start="3" type="I">
<ol style="margin-top:0in" start="1" type="a">
<li class="gmail-m_7594192601191237584MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">We have recommended a number of changes already to CPE, including more transparency, more flexibility to recognize non-economic based communities, increased scrutinization of letters
of opposition, more involvement in the selection process of evaluators, etc. These changes should go a long way to mitigate the issues faced in 2012.<u></u><u></u></li></ol>
</ol>
<p class="gmail-m_7594192601191237584MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:1in"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0in" start="3" type="I">
<ol style="margin-top:0in" start="2" type="a">
<li class="gmail-m_7594192601191237584MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">That said, the current scoring framework was rigid and required a perfect or nearly perfect scoring on every evaluation criteria. As we observed, very few applications were able to
achieve community status.<u></u><u></u></li></ol>
</ol>
<p class="gmail-m_7594192601191237584MsoListParagraph"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0in" start="3" type="I">
<ol style="margin-top:0in" start="3" type="a">
<li class="gmail-m_7594192601191237584MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">On the other hand, merely lowering the scoring down to 12 (from 14) would only have resulted in one additional application during the 2012 round achieving Community Priority.<u></u><u></u></li></ol>
</ol>
<p class="gmail-m_7594192601191237584MsoListParagraph"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0in" start="3" type="I">
<ol style="margin-top:0in" start="4" type="a">
<li class="gmail-m_7594192601191237584MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">Finally, even if we lower the threshold to an actual number, leaves little flexibility to implement a new scoring mechanism (should the ICANN community desire such a new mechanism)
which encompasses all of the policy changes we have recommended.<u></u><u></u></li></ol>
</ol>
<p class="gmail-m_7594192601191237584MsoListParagraph"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="gmail-m_7594192601191237584MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0.75in">
<u></u><span>IV.<span style="font:7pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span><u></u><u>Proposal</u>: <i>Given the Working Group’s affirmation of the importance of the prioritization of community-based applications, and subject to all of the Recommendations and Implementation Guidance set forth in this Report, the Working
Group urges the Implementation Review Team to consider changing the passing score for achieving community priority status from a hard score of 14 out of 16 points to achieving a score of at least 75-80% of the total available evaluation points. This not only
emphasizes the importance we place on community-based applications, but also provides some flexibility in any future scoring methodology.</i><b>
</b><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:0.25in"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Please have your comments (If any) by no later than 23:59:59 UTC on Wednesday, December 16, 2020. Absent a strong showing of support on the list for this change, we will
default back to the original text in the Draft Final Report.</span></b><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:0.25in"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="border-collapse:collapse">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="192" valign="bottom" style="width:144.3pt;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:3pt solid rgb(6,23,95);padding:0in 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:black;border:1pt none windowtext;padding:0in"><img width="178" height="81" style="width: 1.8541in; height: 0.8437in;" id="gmail-m_7594192601191237584Picture_x0020_1" src="cid:176648f63aa4cff311"></span><u></u><u></u></p>
</td>
<td width="173" valign="bottom" style="width:129.95pt;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:3pt solid rgb(6,23,95);padding:0in 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(6,23,95)">Jeffrey J. Neuman</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:black">Founder & CEO</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(6,23,95)">JJN Solutions, LLC</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:black">p: +1.202.549.5079</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:black">E:
</span><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><a href="mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(17,85,204)">jeff@jjnsolutions.com</span></a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:black"><a href="http://jjnsolutions.com" target="_blank">http://jjnsolutions.com</a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:white"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">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" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">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.</blockquote></div>