[Gnso-newgtld-wg] 5th Topical Questions: Applicant Fees

Kavouss Arasteh kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
Wed Dec 9 20:10:21 UTC 2020


Dear All ,Why people use colloquial terms such as spin up or spin in or
pèopuo or popèin
Why we do  do not use clear and plain English
I do not understand the revision made by Donna
Regards
Kavouss

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 8:14 PM Donna at registry.godaddy
<Donna at registry.godaddy> wrote:

> Hi Jeff
>
>
>
> Our emails crossed. I’ve suggested ‘assemble’ as my preferred alternative
> as it best represents the meaning of what I was trying to convey. I think
> there is a valid distinction between the terms and my concern is that ICANN
> will interpret ‘launch’ in a more holistic way and the ‘small percentage’
> of excess fees could be justified at 10% rather than perhaps 2%.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Donna
>
>
>
> *From:* Jeff Neuman <jeff at jjnsolutions.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 9, 2020 10:58 AM
> *To:* Nick Shorey <lists at nickshorey.com>; mail at christopherwilkinson.eu CW
> <mail at christopherwilkinson.eu>; Justine Chew <justine.chew at gmail.com>;
> Donna Austin <Donna at registry.godaddy>
> *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] 5th Topical Questions: Applicant Fees
>
>
>
> Notice: This email is from an external sender.
>
>
>
> Thanks Nick and Justine.  We will choose a less informal term like
> launch.  Keep the comments coming!
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> Jeffrey J. Neuman
>
> Founder & CEO
>
> JJN Solutions, LLC
>
> p: +1.202.549.5079
>
> E: jeff at jjnsolutions.com
>
> http://jjnsolutions.com
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Nick Shorey <lists at nickshorey.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 9, 2020 7:39 AM
> *To:* mail at christopherwilkinson.eu CW <mail at christopherwilkinson.eu>;
> Justine Chew <justine.chew at gmail.com>; Jeff Neuman <jeff at jjnsolutions.com>;
> Donna at registry.godaddy
> *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] 5th Topical Questions: Applicant Fees
>
>
>
> Hola amigos,
>
>
>
> Spin up: Launch; create; assemble.
>
>
>
> Saludos,
>
>
>
> Nick Shorey
>
>
>
> *From: *Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of "mail at christopherwilkinson.eu
> CW <mail at christopherwilkinson.eu%20CW>" <mail at christopherwilkinson.eu>
> *Reply to: *"mail at christopherwilkinson.eu CW" <
> mail at christopherwilkinson.eu>
> *Date: *Wednesday, 9 December 2020 at 13:21
> *To: *Justine Chew <justine.chew at gmail.com>, Jeff Neuman <
> jeff at jjnsolutions.com>, "Donna at registry.godaddy" <Donna at registry.godaddy>
> *Cc: *"gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] 5th Topical Questions: Applicant Fees
>
>
>
> Good morning:
>
> <Spin> in this context is basically pejorative, implying arguments that
> endeavour to hide unwelcome truths. Whence, <spin doctors>.
>
> <Spin up …> I do not know. Perhaps one meant <sign up to>, I which case I
> would disagree.
>
> In view of the wide range of issues that have been fudged by the PDP in
> deference to a consensus of incumbents, personally, I have no expectation
> that the eventual 2021 AGB could be re-used in the future without
> significant changes.
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> CW
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> El 9 de diciembre de 2020 a las 11:40 Justine Chew <justine.chew at gmail.com>
> escribió:
>
> Is there a better term than "spin up"?
>
> Justine
>
>
>
> On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 at 04:36, Jeff Neuman < jeff at jjnsolutions.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Donna. I think these additions make a lot of sense and strengthen
> the proposal.
>
>
>
> Anyone else have thoughts on this modified version?
>
>
>
> Jeffrey J. Neuman
>
> Founder & CEO
>
> JJN Solutions, LLC
>
> p: +1.202.549.5079
>
> E: jeff at jjnsolutions.com
>
> http://jjnsolutions.com
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Donna at registry.godaddy <Donna at registry.godaddy>
> *Sent:* Friday, December 4, 2020 2:39 PM
> *To:* Jeff Neuman <jeff at jjnsolutions.com>; gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* RE: 5th Topical Questions: Applicant Fees
>
>
>
> Jeff, all
>
>
>
> Some suggested changes to a. below. I think it would be best if we
> provided guidance on what the funds could be used for and ensure
> transparency.
>
>
>
> *Leadership Recommendation* - *Proposed Implementation Guidance:*
>
>    1. Although ICANN must operate the new gTLD Program on a Cost Recovery
>       basis (subject to any floors as set forth in this report) ICANN org may
>       set aside a certain small percentage of excess fees (to the extent there
>       are excess fees) to apply towards covering the costs of maintaining
>       the capability to spin up future subsequent rounds of new gTLDs with
>       minimum delay and to ensure that the new gTLD Program is able to
>       continue into the future. For example, retaining staff with program
>       expertise and maintaining requisite systems. Any excess fees set aside by
>       ICANN for this purpose must be explicitly recorded and justified.
>       2. In addition, with the remainder of any excess fees, ICANN may
>       establish a schedule for the disbursement of refunds upon the achievement
>       of specified milestones.  For illustrative purposes only, such a schedule
>       could establish that once 50% of the applications have been fully processed
>       (eg., delegated, withdrawn, or not approved), ICANN would issue a payment
>       of 25% of the excess fees back to the applicants.
>       3. ICANN should further explore these with the Implementation
>       Review Team and ensure that the resulting implementation is clearly
>       documented in the Applicant Guidebook.
>
>
>
> Donna
>
>
>
> Donna Austin
>
> Head of Registry Policy
>
> GoDaddy Registry
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org> *On Behalf Of
> *Jeff Neuman
> *Sent:* Friday, December 4, 2020 6:05 AM
> *To:* gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* [Gnso-newgtld-wg] 5th Topical Questions: Applicant Fees
>
>
>
> Notice: This email is from an external sender.
>
>
>
> All,
>
>
>
> This is the *Fifth Topical E-mail* on outstanding questions being “put to
> the list.”  This covers Applicant Fees (Topic 15)
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> Lets not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
>
>
>
>
>
> *Working Group Draft Report:*
>
> a.       *Recommendation 15.7*: In managing funds for the New gTLD
> Program, ICANN must have a plan in place for managing any excess fees
> collected or budget shortfalls experienced. The plan for the management and
> disbursement of excess fees, if applicable, must be communicated in advance
> of accepting applications and collecting fees for subsequent procedures.
> The implementation guidance below describes in more detail how this should
> be accomplished.
>
> b.       *Implementation Guidance 15.8*: If excess fees are collected in
> subsequent procedures and the cost recovery model is followed (i.e., the
> application fee floor is not implemented) any excess fees should be
> returned to applicants where possible. The disbursement mechanism must be
> communicated before applicants submit applications and fees to ICANN.
>
>
>
> *ICANN Board Comment*:  The Board notes the PDP’s Recommendation 15.7:
> “In managing funds for the New gTLD Program, ICANN must have a plan in
> place for managing any excess fees collected or budget shortfalls
> experienced. The plan for the management and disbursement of excess fees,
> if applicable, must be communicated in advance of accepting applications
> and collecting fees for subsequent procedures.” The Board asks the PDP to
> more carefully examine the concept of “excess” or shortage of fees,
> especially in the light of the likely need for ICANN org, a not-for- profit
> organization, to increase resources for the application process and the
> continued support of the new gTLD program. The proposed principle of cost
> recovery of the next round, as for the 2012 round is understood as a clear
> mechanism to state to the public that the fee to be paid by applicants is
> designed to only cover for the cost of the program and not to support
> non-program operations of ICANN org. the proposed principle does not
> require a dollar-to-dollar return of any potential excess. The lack of a
> clear definition of “closure” and “round” for any new gTLD subsequent
> procedures future ‘round’ is also problematic in this context and the Board
> encourages the PDP WG to contemplate including such definition in its Final
> Report. (Pg. 63)
>
>
>
> *Working Group Discussion:*  There are several main points in this
> comment.  First is that there should be some money set aside to continue to
> fund the ongoing new gTLD Program for subsequent rounds.  Second, there is
> an issue as to the timing of when refunds are issued.
>
>
>
> *Leadership Recommendation* - *Proposed Implementation Guidance:*
>
>    1. Although ICANN must operate the new gTLD Program on a Cost Recovery
>    basis (subject to any floors as set forth in this report) may set aside a
>    certain small percentage of excess fees (to the extent there are excess
>    fees) to apply towards covering the costs of future subsequent rounds of
>    new gTLDs to ensure that the new gTLD Program is able to continue into the
>    future.
>    2. In addition, with the remainder of any excess fees, ICANN may
>    establish a schedule for the disbursement of refunds upon the achievement
>    of specified milestones.  For illustrative purposes only, such a schedule
>    could establish that once 50% of the applications have been fully processed
>    (eg., delegated, withdrawn, or not approved), ICANN would issue a payment
>    of 25% of the excess fees back to the applicants.
>    3. ICANN should further explore these with the Implementation Review
>    Team and ensure that the resulting implementation is clearly documented in
>    the Applicant Guidebook.
>
>
>
> *Please have your comments (If any) by no later than 23:59:59 UTC on
> Tuesday, December 8, 2020.*
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Jeff & Cheryl
>
> SubPro Co-Chairs
>
>
>
>
>
> Jeffrey J. Neuman
>
> Founder & CEO
>
> JJN Solutions, LLC
>
> p: +1.202.549.5079
>
> E: jeff at jjnsolutions.com
>
> http://jjnsolutions.com
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg
> _______________________________________________
> 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 ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). 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.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg
> _______________________________________________
> 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 (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). 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.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg
> _______________________________________________
> 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 (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20201209/e9939171/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 9610 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20201209/e9939171/image002-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 9768 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20201209/e9939171/image004-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.png
Type: image/png
Size: 9596 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20201209/e9939171/image005-0001.png>


More information about the Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list