Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Board resolution during retreat regarding Applicant Support

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

While I consider it my right to cast blame on the staff whenever I consider it 
appropriate and I abhor the policy of attacking anyone who has a cross word to 
say about the staff, I do not think anyone actually did cast blame on the 
staff.   Though I freely admit that my comment about the staffism inherent in 
the explanation of uncertainty may be seen as attributing some of the reasoning 
behind the Board's position to staff.

The request from Evan, which I completely endorse, for a full un-redacted view 
of the report that staff submitted on our work and their views on our work, is 
the only properly transparent way to behave.  One does not need to cast blame 
on staff to demand they make public any and all reports dealing with this group.

We do not know what they said and the members of this group, in my estimation, 
have every right to know given the response we received from the ICANN Board.

a.



On 27 Sep 2010, at 15:04, Elaine Pruis wrote:

> Avri,
> 
> My comment was intended to bring the consideration back to our working group 
> rather than go on attack against staff. I see those three items as a group 
> responsibility.  We chose to mire in some topics rather than hit consensus or 
> deadlines.
> 
> I'm sure there are elements of truth to all the hypothesis; but I think we 
> need to search within before casting blame outside.
> 
> Elaine
> 
> On Sep 27, 2010, at 11:52 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I am not sure the short report had anything to do with it, as I was 
>> specifically asked to keep it short.  I am not so sure that being late had 
>> anything to do with it either.  There had it in time.
>> 
>> There were some very strong opinions expressed by various Board members 
>> (quoted from private conversations at the IGF) against any price breaks for 
>> anyone.
>> 
>> There were some strong statements by various board members (quoted from 
>> private conversations at the IGF) saying that we needed a really good 
>> explanation on why those needing aid should not wait for future rounds.
>> 
>> The phrase on the "uncertainty associated with the launch of new gTLD" 
>> strikes me as the same staffism that brought us a 100,000 ISD base fee based 
>> on hand waving about the difficulty of predicting risk.  I am not sure that 
>> is due to any of the reasons you listed.
>> 
>> But as a co-chair responsible for:
>> 
>> a. not making sure we were done in August
>> b. the report being late
>> c. the report being incomplete
>> 
>> I am willing to take responsibility for the Board's lack of understanding 
>> and inability to see beyond western economic realities to the need for a 
>> level playing field for global applicants.
>> 
>> a.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 27 Sep 2010, at 14:28, Elaine Pruis wrote:
>> 
>>> The disappointing resolution probably had more to do with: first, missing 
>>> our deadline in August, second, a late report, third, the lack of a 
>>> complete report; than anything the staff may or may not have done.
>>> 
>>> Elaine
>>> On Sep 27, 2010, at 10:55 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Karla, thanks for the update.
>>>> 
>>>> As co-chair of this group, I am formally requesting a full and accurate 
>>>> transcript of the staff report to the Board retreat on this issue, as well 
>>>> as any related presentations and background materials.
>>>> 
>>>> - Evan
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 27 September 2010 13:02, Karla Valente <karla.valente@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> 2.2 New gTLD Applicant Support
>>>> 
>>>> ==============================
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Support to applicants will generally include outreach and education to 
>>>> encourage participation across all regions, but any direct financial 
>>>> support for applicant fees must come from sources outside of ICANN.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Staff will publish a list of organizations that request assistance and 
>>>> organizations that state an interest in assisting with additional program 
>>>> development, for example pro-bono consulting advice, pro-bono in-kind 
>>>> support, or financial assistance so that those needing assistance and 
>>>> those willing to provide assistance can identify each other and work 
>>>> together.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Owing to the level of uncertainty associated with the launch of new gTLDs, 
>>>> the fee levels currently in the Applicant Guidebook will be maintained for 
>>>> all applicants.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Elaine Pruis
>>> VP Client Services
>>> elaine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> +1 509 899 3161
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> Elaine Pruis
> VP Client Services
> elaine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> +1 509 899 3161
>