RE: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Agenda for Tuesday 16 november

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Please let me clarify.  My recommended amendment was not intended to replace 
anything in the existing charter but rather to be an added task.

 

Chuck

 

From: owner-soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Evan Leibovitch
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 11:02 AM
To: Avri Doria
Cc: soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Agenda for Tuesday 16 november

 

 

On 15 November 2010 08:40, Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx> wrote:



Most importantly there has been a request for an amendment to change one of the 
work items

from:

> Review the basis of the US$100,000 application base fee to determine its full 
> origin and to determine what percentage of that fee could be waived for 
> applicants meeting the requirements for assistance.”


to:

> “Work with the ICANN new gTLD implementation staff to determine how the fee 
> waivers would be funded.”

I have argued that these motions are not interchangeable,



I don't see this as a matter of opinion. They clearly are not interchangable 
and indicate a significant departure. The proposed change asserts that the 
"waiver" would be an externally funded subsidy rather than fee reduction.

They're not mutually exclusive and I don't see why not to include both.

- Evan