RE: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] quick update - my first impressions of the Brussels meeting

[Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I start a message to ask question about the meeting in SFO.

I have some concern and question on that meeting.
Taking into account some of discussion (exposed by Avri in his mail) I
suggest that the WG may thing of 2 meetings (if not 3).
But I fell that a public meeting is needed allowing GAC members (not
representative of the GAC) and other to come to exchange with the WG.
Do you (we) need a meeting of the WG prior?
But for sure we need a WG meeting after. 1:30 hours is too short.
A lot is waited from the group.
And now a question and a warning about the day. Thursday 17th will have the
Board-GAC consultations? I don't have info about the hours scheduled. But
maybe it will be at the same time.
I will not be able to be on the next calls (I will try my best).
Next Friday I will be in a meeting and Tuesday 8th I will be travelling.
But I hope to be available in SFO to interact with the group.
All the best

PS the transcript of the 1st day will be publish and will allow you to see
the exchanges Avri is talking about.

Sébastien Bachollet
sebastien@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Member of the ICANN Board
Blog: http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/
Mobile (France): +33 6 07 66 89 33
Skype: sebastien-bachollet
Jabber: sbacholl@xxxxxxxxxx


> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : owner-soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-soac-newgtldapsup-
> wg@xxxxxxxxx] De la part de Avri Doria
> Envoyé : mardi 1 mars 2011 11:53
> À : soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> Objet : [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] quick update - my first impressions of the
> Brussels meeting
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> One person's view of where we are at on support for applicants in
Brussels.
> 
> I think things are going well for the cause of Applicant support at this
> meeting.
> 
> Alice, as the GAC point person on the issue, made a very good statement of
the
> importance of this work to the GAC and as is done in their scorecard
linked it
> to the work we were doing.  She made a point of our interim report having
been
> a focus for the GAc.
> 
> Katim, the Board point person on the topic, indicated that the Board too
saw
> this work as important.  Sebastien also gave supporting words on the work
> being done and even encouraged GAC members to come and help witht he work.
I
> thought this was great.
> 
> The conversation was extensive and it got into the details of price
reductions
> as well as other forms of support.
> 
> A most interesting comment was made by Peter about the Board now being
open to
> consider price reductions for certain applicants.  When Sébastien ask him
to
> repeat that to make sure we had heard correctly, Peter quoted the GNSO's
> Implementation guideline N:
> 
> > ICANN may put in place a fee reduction scheme for gTLD applicants from
> economies classified by the UN as least developed.
> 
> 
> 
> So we are on track.
> 
> But, the focus is really on us.  The Board is asking for our status and
date
> for delivery of the final report.  I passed the request for a status
report on
> to the co-chairs, but in the meantime did give Katim the general structure
of
> how we going about doing the work and our schedule of work.
> 
> This group is seen as key by both the Board and the GAC as the place where
the
> work is being done and from which the recommended solutions will emerge.
We
> have convinced people how important our work is, and now they need to
results
> - real soon now.
> 
> I hope others who are here add to this and if any more news comes my way,
will
> pass it on.
> 
> a.
> 
> 
>