Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Updated 2.15.3 - for Tuesday 12 Oct 10 mtg. Re: [] Revision 2.15 -

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Elaine,

Thanks for your comments, I have included them in a copy of the draft I will 
send out later today.

Specific responses in line below.


On 14 Oct 2010, at 12:58, Elaine Pruis wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
>  I've had a good read through of the current document and have posted some 
> minor edits below. I also want to add a few lines.
> 
> Understanding the disappointment with the Board not adopting most of our 
> recommendations, I strongly feel we should in our report acknowledge and 
> highlight to a greater extent the positive elements of resolution 2.2: 
> outreach, and support clearinghouse  of resolution 2.2 from Trondheim:
> 
> "Support to applicants will generally include outreach and education to 
> encourage participation across all regions"
> "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"
> 
> Perhaps something as simple as an acknowledgement sentence in section 3:
> "The Working Group acknowledges and appreciates the Board's Trondheim 
> resolution 2.2 assent of the working group's recommendations for coordinating 
> providers and recipients, and increased awareness and outreach efforts to 
> needy applicants.  However we feel that with further work more support 
> methods could be approved for implementation."

Good Idea.  I have put the following in as the last paragraph of section 3.

The Working Group also wishes to acknowledge and appreciate the Board's 
Trondheim resolution 2.2 that appears to support the working group's 
recommendations for coordinating providers and recipients, and increased 
awareness and outreach efforts to needy applicants. However we feel that with 
further work, as recommend above, more of the support mechanisms should be 
approved for implementation.

I said 'appears to be support'  because it is uncertain whether they are saying 
that the plan already anticipated doing this, or are saying they are approving 
our recommendations.

> 
> Finally, please add the posting of the blog in the time line on June 14, 
> “Call for Input: Support for New gTLD Applicants” 
> (http://blog.icann.org/2010/06/call-for-input-support-for-new-gtld-applicants/)
>  ; and as an Addenda in the report.  

I have added it to the list of addenda in the appendix.  Karla can you add this 
to the addenda?

> 
> ----------------
> EDITS:
> 
> Line 70 fix:
> This Final Report incorporates the feedback received from the public ad other 
>  

done  ad -> and

> 
> LIne 114 fix: (should be recommendations)
> 
> In addition to recommendation that should be taken by ICANN to enable 
> applicants 

done

> 
> Line 472: (should be constraints)
> 
> to the time constrains, and the interest in getting GNSO Council, ALAC and 
> Board’s 

done.

but on rereading the sentence I thought it might be a little outdated and 
changed it as follows:

Due to the time constraints, and in the interest in getting GNSO Council, ALAC 
and Board’s endorsement for the basic recommendations, the following work items 
are proposed for further discussion by the current Join SO/AC new gTLD 
Applicant Support WG or another group.

Note: on the rest of these the line numbers have changed due to the addition of 
the paragraph above.

> 
> line 499 (should be fundraising, add a period after "agencies")
> a)    Begin the work of fund raising and establishing links to possible donor 
> agencies.


found sever instance of 'fund raising' and changed them all.
added the period.

> 
> line 502: (should be waived)
> full origin and to determine what percentage of that fee could be waved for 

done

> line 567 (capitalize The)
> 
> applicants who meet the requirements of the program.  the guideline allows 
> for 

done

> 
> 
> Line 577
> insert "be"
> to be met.  In those cases of community gTLDs where a community is either  

done