[gnso-osc-csg] GNSO CSG Meeting Tomorrow: 15 January 1400 UTC -- Comments Received

[Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Work Team members,

I have reviewed the comments received on the list in anticipation of our call 
tomorrow to discuss Task 1, Subtask 1.  Note that this call is scheduled for 
two hours in case we need the time.  Here are the consolidated comments from 
the list.  Suggested changes to the text that have been suggested, but not 
commented on by all Work Team members, are included in the document on the wiki 
but in curly brackets {} as well as in capital letters.  Please see the link 
at: 
https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_stakeholder_group_operations_work_team_task_1_subtask_1.
  For brief notes of our discussion on 08 January see: 
https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_operations_team.

If you have questions concerning the comments or if I have missed anyone's 
comments, please let me know.  Thank you.

Best regards,

Julie

1.  Text Provided by Victoria on 08 January on Section 1, Item C - appended 
text in curly brackets and all caps.

All GROUPs shall improve inclusiveness and representativeness and shall explore 
the possibility to have differential fee structures based on ability to pay , 
in order to encourage increased representation from those living in less 
developed economies. {ALL GROUPS SHOULD HAVE A MECHANISM FOR ANY POTENTIAL 
MEMBER TO APPLY FOR A HARDSHIP RELIEF FROM THE NORMAL FEE SCALE}.

2.  Text Provided by Claudio on 09 January on Section 1, Item C - in curly 
brackets and all caps.

All GROUPs shall improve inclusiveness and representativeness and shall explore 
the possibility to have differential fee structures based on ability to pay, 
{OR HARDSHIP PROVISIONS}, in order to encourage increased representation from 
those living in less developed economies.

3.  Additional comments on Claudio's text:  Victoria asked, "would that then 
render it only an obligation to 'explore' having a hardship provision --not a 
recommendation to have one?"  Tony and Krista commented that they agreed with 
Claudio's suggested text.

4. Comments from Krista on 11 January:


 *   Translation into other languages.  I still am unclear as to who pays for 
the translation.  I checked the Toolkit document (Subtask 1.4) and did not see 
where it provided for language translation.  If that is the case, I think 1). 
It should be made clear in Subtask 1.1 if translation is at the expense of the 
GROUP, and 2). If that is the case I don't agree with Victoria's statement on 
the call that the costs of translation is minimal.  Costs are relative and 
depending on the budget of a GROUP this may not be feasible.
 *   Section 2b discussion regarding all GROUPs being open to individuals - 
This provision does cannot apply to ALL GROUPs, and should continue to state 
that GROUPs are open to individuals "as applicable".  In order to be a member 
of the RrSG, one must be business that is an accredited registrar.  I believe 
this same requirement applies to the RySG, ISPCPC, etc., not to mention future 
GROUPs which are currently undefined.  I believe this is another example of a 
place where one size does not fit all and we must be careful we don't try to 
make "it" fit.