[CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] [GTLD-WG] Fwd: Calltfortfeedback on proposed At-Large/ALAC positions to NewtgTLDtSubsequent Procedures Supplemental Initial Report

[Alan Greenberg]

When I weigh the potential benefits to an RFP-approach to final decisions - the potential for picking the "right" applicant (understanding that "right" is a value-judgement) vs the chance for setting it up with the best intentions but the results being less than satisfactory, I am afraid that the scale is HEAVILY weighted in the second side. There are just too many ways that this can go awry to be added at the last moment and with no opportunity to test it until it is too late.

Alan


At 16/12/2018 05:52 PM, Jonathan Zuck wrote:

I think we really need to choose our battles in this one and that doesn't include changing the whole program over...

Jonathan Zuck
Executive Director
Innovators Network Foundation
www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.Innovatorsnetwork.org>

________________________________
From: GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander at schubert.berlin>
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2018 5:37:38 PM
To: cpwg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] Fwd: [registration-issues-wg] Call for feedback on proposed At-Large/ALAC positions to New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Supplemental Initial Report

Hi,

To that point (RFP-type of solution):

It seems that in the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of cases it has been "portfolio applicants" squaring off against each other; and they just wanted a "fair compensation" for "giving up their asset". All of them are the same "good" or "bad": they make the TLD available via registrar channel.

Only a very small percentage of contention sets ended up at the ICANN last resort love-fest. So I think these few cases could be resolved in a RFP style way.......

The question is: Even if ALAC is in agreement with such stipulation; how to convince the rest of ICANN?

Thanks,

Alexander


-----Original Message-----
From: GTLD-WG [ mailto:gtld-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Gordon Chillcott
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2018 11:16 PM
To: cw at christopherwilkinson.eu
Cc: cpwg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] Fwd: [registration-issues-wg] Call for feedback on proposed At-Large/ALAC positions to New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Supplemental Initial Report

Christopher:

Although I am not a fan of the idea of an auction of any type, I am warming to the idea that this might be the most feasible alternative.

Of the other candidate solutions, the best would probably be the Request for Proposal (RFP) route.  This would answer the one question that auctions are weakest on - how is this applicant qualified to operate this particular TLD?

Having said that, Requests for Proposal would need to be quite carefully
crafted.      Criteria for selection of an applicant would need to be
carefully and specifically described in order to measure the applicant against the purpose of the new TLD.  This is not easy and, in fact, can be expensive.

Collection and evaluation of the responses, which is going to involve carefully measuring the response  against the RFP's  criteria to find
“the best fit”   .is another effort that  would need to be considered
and costed out.

Part of that cost, by the way, is the time required to develop the RFP, collect the responses and evaluate them – all of which contribute to the
length of time needed to make a decision.

My own experience suggests that these costs would  need to be examined and compared to the cost of an auction of whatever type.


Gordon Chillcott
Greater Toronto Area Linux Users Group

On Wed, 2018-12-12 at 21:28 +0100, cw at christopherwilkinson.eu wrote:
> Pour memoire
>
> CW
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg


_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________
GTLD-WG mailing list
GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg

Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs

_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________
GTLD-WG mailing list
GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg

Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________
registration-issues-wg mailing list
registration-issues-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20181216/a2440d3c/attachment-0001.html>