[Gnso-newgtld-wg] Mp3, Attendance & AC Chat for New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG
michelle.desmyter at icann.org
Mon Jun 6 19:56:22 UTC 2016
Please find the attendance of the call attached to this email and the MP3 recording below for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call held on Monday, 06 June 2016 at 16:00 UTC.
<http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-16may16-en.mp3> <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-09may16-en.mp3http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-09may16-en.mp3> http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-06jun16-en.mp3 <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-06jun16-en.mp3>
The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page:
** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **
Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/
Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/GhmOAw
Adobe Connect chat transcript for Monday, 06 June 2016
Michelle DeSmyter: Dear All, Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG call on Monday, 6 June 2016 at 16:00 UTC.
Steve Coates (Twitter):Apologies, someone "borrowed" my headset, so I'll be without a phone for the first part of the call.
Philip Corwin:Hello all. Regrets but I shall have to exit this call after the first hour.
Jim Prendergast:Same for me
Susan Payne:hi Avri, you are very muffled
Martin Sutton:muffled & echoey
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):audio needs to be better
Paul McGrady:Hi all!
Susan Payne:yes thanks
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):better
Avri Doria:on community comment versus constitunecy comment, we just need to confirm what the PDP guidelines mention and perhaps add a note that tis comment period repsonds to that requirement.
Mary Wong:@Steve, that is correct
Avri Doria:i do support the change, was just being cautious
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Agree
Mary Wong:Thanks, Avri - basically the PDP Manual speaks to "statements from SG/Cs" and "input" from other SO/ACs.
Avri Doria:ok, constiruency comment was the old terminology. thanks.
Susan Payne:@Stave, yes that was what I had in mind thanks
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):I see what you mean Greg
Greg Shatan:We need to avoid jargon and terms of art.... "ongoing mechanism" won't be understood by many who are "in" the process...
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):I agree Greg we do and avoid ambiguities where we cn
Greg Shatan:Especially since there is no such thing as a "mechanism" that is not ongoing in some fashion, based on our jargon.
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:The Process = Mechanism
Susan Payne:I agree with Greg that "ongoing mechanism" might be misunderstood. Greg's suggestion seems a good one - but we could just define it as a term if it is used throughout if easier
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:this is a Metaphor
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Sounds like we need to deine the term
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:the WG, in My opinion is trying to change or bring about a change and define Something that is used in the ICANN WIDE documentation
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:The Foot Note is good
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:as the word Mechanism will remain relevant to the entire
vanda SCARTEZINI:sorry to be so late. without connection till now
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:thats correct
Grace Mutung'u:apologies for joining late. catching up
Greg Shatan:It's not currently ongoing, based on the definition of ongoing as "in progress". I think it's an unfortunate term to use in this context.
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:we should as the WG should only recomend a direction and not getinto an English Literature class
Greg Shatan:Especially since one of the issues is whether the mechanism will be "periodic" or "ongoing."
Greg Shatan:I will die in a dithc on this one.
Steve Coates (Twitter):I like dithc better.
Greg Shatan:If I'm confused once a week, that is not "ongoing."
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:we shud now do a time based approach on the mailing. With Suggestions. Later and Move on with the rest of the document.
Greg Shatan:If I'm confused continuously, that is ongoing.
Avri Doria:a periodic process is an ongoing process. the wheels on my bike for around with periodicity, but it is ongoing.
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:ongoingˈɒnɡəʊɪŋ/adjectivecontinuing; still in progress."ongoing negotiations"synonyms: in progress, under way, going on, continuing, happening, occurring, taking place, proceeding, being done, being worked on, being performed, current, extant, existing, existent, progressing, advancing, evolving, growing, developing
Greg Shatan:If your bike is stopped, the wheels are not ongoing.
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:Till the new Process starts, its ongoing
Greg Shatan:It's ambigouous and confusing.
Rubens Kuhl:Sometimes we need to sacrifice precise language in favor of commonly understable language.
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:periodicˌpɪərɪˈɒdɪk/Submitadjective1.appearing or occurring at intervals."the periodic visits she made to her father"synonyms: regular, periodical, at fixed intervals, recurrent, recurring, repeated, cyclical, cyclic, seasona
vanda SCARTEZINI:+ 1 Kuhl
Steve Coates (Twitter):Not strong on this one either way.
Katrin Ohlmer | DOTZON:+1 Rubens
Kristina Rosette (Amazon):I see Greg's point. I'd like to see the proposed definition that we're chatting about before making a decision one way or the other.
Greg Shatan:Rubens, which one do you consider precise and which do you consider commonly understandable?
Rubens Kuhl:I would change the text to "an at some point ongoing", but that would fit my personal taste for precision.
Paul McGrady:"orderly, timely and predictable" is what was used before
Greg Shatan:Agree let's not beat a dead horse....
Kristina Rosette (Amazon):Yes, it's Monday, but I'd appreciate it if we moved away from the death metaphors.
Martin Sutton:Or remove 'Specification 13' for that category
Alexander Schubert:There might be overlaps: E.G. a nonprofit, geo, community
Paul McGrady:Challenge Policy Restricted Registry
Avri Doria:may be a subtype of valaidated
Paul McGrady:Challenge rather than validated.
Avri Doria:the minor is not related to size
Paul McGrady:Minor/major could change overnight with an XYZ-like sale though.
Kristina Rosette (Amazon):"material" wouldn't be correct here, yes?
Alexander Schubert:the number of registrations is completely irrelevant to the TLD's impact
Greg Shatan:How about "Open TLD with self-validated restrictions"?
Paul McGrady:+1 Alexander
Jeff Neuman:Correct. I am sure the Registry Operators for .biz and .name would not want be happy with being called minor TLDs :)
Steve Coates (Twitter):@paul and @kristina +1 +1
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Agree Greg
Rubens Kuhl:non-legacy would include .biz, .info, .name.
Kristina Rosette (Amazon):Have to drop because of conflicting meeting at top of the hour (and need internal transit time). I'll catch up with the end of the transcript.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):bye
Avri Doria:thanks Kristina
Paul McGrady:Apologies all, but I have to drop off due to a non-profit Board meeting a few blocks away.
Avri Doria:thanks Paul
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):bye paul
Alexander Schubert:maybe to cover the unknown issues there should be an appeals process!
Richard Padilla:Hello all sorry for being late
Steve Coates (Twitter):Welcome, Richard.
Mary Wong:What about "such as"?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):e.g. is ok
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:The word Rounds is anyways being replaced ?
Alexander Schubert:how do you know 100 applications belong to one entity?
Steve Coates (Twitter):Vaibhav - I think we should be consistent with not using "rounds." Perhaps "Subsequent Procedures."
Avri Doria:Indeed Alexander that is why the questions asks how one could do that.
Alexander Schubert:just create 100 legal entities offshore - done
Avri Doria:depdns on how the limit is written and subsequent evidence that such was done could cause issues.
Greg Shatan:Look at the subject heading....
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:@Steve u r Correct
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:@Steve I Agree
Avri Doria:as you said earlier Vaibhav, we are writing this for the SOAC/SG/c not for open comment
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:Yes maam
Alexander Schubert:there should be a bonus for those going public with their string UPFRONT!
Alexander Schubert:You risk a lot by going public years upfront (like .music or .nyc) - that should be honored!
Jeff Neuman:Sorry, not sure what happened to audio
Jeff Neuman:But to clarify, I was not talking about a limit to the number of apps per string, but rather the limit being on the number of strings applied for
Jeff Neuman:(Sorry for ending in a preposition)
Avri Doria:Jeff, ( :
Martin Sutton:Could we simply add 'and/or the total number of strings' within each of the questions?
Greg Shatan:Revised heading for subject 6: Application limits during an application “round” -- either total applications or applications per applicant.
Cecilia Smith:Will there be consideration on whether the applicant already has applied/been awared in the previous round?
Alexander Schubert:what if the last round had been limited to 300 strings? how would we have sorted that out?
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:The Word "Round" is also was agreed to be not used- is it ?
Greg Shatan:Would there be limits if there weren't rounds?
Jeff Neuman:I think g should be moved up to before e
Greg Shatan:I would not compare Avri to a background noise....
Avri Doria:i sometimes feel like background noise.
Greg Shatan:number should be singular in 6.g.
Greg Shatan:That's not why we're calling it aggregate....
Jeff Neuman:can change "entity" to "applicant". But then we should ask whether an "applicant" includes Affiliates
Martin Sutton:An applicant can't be an individual
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):I thought we were shifting "aggregate" to Total
Mary Wong:@Cheryl, yes
Jeff Neuman:An applicant in the 2012 "round" could not be an individual (but in theory we can change that)
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):thanks Mary thought I had dropped a stitch ;-)
Martin Sutton:@jeff - true, could be changed
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):at 0312 local time quite possible to have missed a point of change of course ;-)
Rubens Kuhl:@Jeff, @Martin: likely some applications came from jurisdictions where an individual can incorporate just by saying so without any public license, so that would probably level the field if allowed. Something to look at, when time comes in the PDP.
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:@Greg I am not gonna die in a Ditch
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:PLease do not be Personal
Steve Coates (Twitter):If one more person dies in a ditch, the crows will feast for days.
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:I am gonna Tweet to you
Greg Shatan:If you have something to say, say it here.
Jeff Neuman:That is why I suggested adding g to be before e
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):that works Jeff
Avri Doria:sorry Jeff, i missed you saying it, apologies for repeating it it ass if i had thought of it.
Jeff Neuman:No problem. Not sure what happened to my audio so I am resigned to using the chat
Avri Doria:ah, though spurious double ssss
Dietmar Lenden - Valideus Ltd:i can hear you
Alexander Schubert 4:all fine
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):why not online?
jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland):Should be a pdf/word - yes
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):or optio bot
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):optio both
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):optioN
jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland):As for the GAC, I guess we would be answering with a letter
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):yes Jorge thus options
Steve Coates (Twitter):Probably not.
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:It could be good if we can wrk more on it and Get it made Objective
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:Narrow Choices in some Sections
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:Not all of course
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:and sections can have a "Remarks"
Mary Wong:It will be a very long online questionnaire due to the length of this document
Greg Shatan:Word doc in addition to PDF please, so we can prepare drafts in the document.
Mary Wong:Consolidating all the responses if some are online and some are Word/PDF could also be more cumbersome.
Jeff Neuman:Like the Guidebook, we can separate into sub fora, one for each section
Greg Shatan:We need a tool that allows answers to be put in out of order, saved and edited again.
Martin Sutton:Could we request that responses are concise and do not include endless attachments/links so that we only use the responses given to the specific questions
Martin Sutton:would help with the review of responses
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:@Jeff Agree
Mary Wong:Agree with Steve; esp as different groups seem to have different preferences for different tools and formats.
Steve Coates (Twitter):Dropping off. Apologies.
Greg Shatan:I would do 45. We have Helsinki to take into account.
Jeff Neuman:As we will likely be working on the tracks, I do not believe giving the extra time would be disruptive of our schedule
Mary Wong:Given the number of questions, staff recommends 45 over 35 days for the reasons Steve noted.
Jeff Neuman:We will discuss Helsinki next week!
Dietmar Lenden - Valideus Ltd:cheers all
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:thanks @Avri @Steve @Jeff
Alexander Schubert:bye to all
Rubens Kuhl:Congrats to the WG!
VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:Bye All
Sara Bockey:than you all
jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland):thanks and bye!
Richard Padilla:bye all
Cecilia Smith:thank you
Greg Shatan:Goodbye everybody!
Freida Tallon:Thanks all
Harold Arcos:thanks everyone, take care
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Attendance New gTLD 06 June Sheet1.pdf
Size: 33238 bytes
Desc: Attendance New gTLD 06 June Sheet1.pdf
More information about the Gnso-newgtld-wg