Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Question 1: Size of applicant pool for support

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

It was debated extensively, but I do not yet perceive the consensus.  Hence my 
question.  I mentioned during the meeting that I would be sending out the 
question.

a.

On 31 Aug 2010, at 03:51, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote:

> Hi Avri,
>  
> This issue was debated in length, and we finally decided in the 2 last calls 
> not to restrict the support to only one category. It was a consensus. The 
> pool seize will be will determined by the resources available, but not by an 
> arbitrary decision of our WG to exclude all the categories except one. The 
> consensus was that applicants meeting one of the a to e criteria (with no 
> preference order) plus the main one which is the need are eligible.
>  
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Tijani BEN JEMAA
> Executive Director
> Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations
> Phone : + 216 70 825 231
> Mobile : + 216 98 330 114
> Fax     : + 216 70 825 231
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>  
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : owner-soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx] De la part de Avri Doria
> Envoyé : lundi 30 août 2010 23:04
> À : soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> Objet : [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Question 1: Size of applicant pool for support
>  
>  
> Hi,
>  
> I was supposed to send this message out on Friday.  Apologies.
>  
> An open issue that needs to be resolved before getting back to word-smithing  
> of the final report is to what degree do we want to restrict the pool of 
> applicants eligible for whatever assistance we can muster up. Also referred 
> to as the size of the funnel in the call.
>  
> We currently have a proposal that:
>  
> a. first judges need
> b. then if there is need, as long as you meet conditions a-e  you get 
> assistance.
>  
> The process in the snapshot said:
>  
> If you meet conditions A and have need you get support.
>  
> Obviously the pool of possible applicants is larger in the proposal than in 
> the snapshot.
>  
> In deciding to move toward this proposal and away from the situation as 
> documented in the snapshot, we need to determine whether:
>  
> a. this change is in response to a strong call by the comments
> b. this change is favored by a consensus in the group.
>  
> I don't know the answer to either of those questions yet.
>  
> What do people think?
>  
> a.
>  
>  
>  
>  
>