[soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Fwd: [council] Re: Second Milestone Report of the JAS CWG

[Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello,

below you find the question from Wolf-Ulrich.
we have now two threads regarding the question but maybe we need to format
our answers and compile all those question in document to be sent as
response.

Regards,

Rafik

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 2011/5/11
Subject: AW: [council] Re: Second Milestone Report of the JAS CWG
To: stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx, rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx,
carlton.samuels@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx


 All,

I'd like to add some more to Stéphane´s questions (according to the report
structure):

3. Qualification of applicants: I've some doubt's an applicant's self
declaration might be sufficient. At least appropriate references should be
provided.

3.1.2 under-served language: similar to Stéphane, what are the criteria to
define these communities (number of members...)

3.1.3 emerging markets - poor regions: in the note to 3.1.5 reference should
be made to the existing (and to the potential lack of) technical
infrastructure

3.2 Financial need: How is the contribution of 45,000 $ calculated? Is this
just 25% of the regular application fee?

4.1 Financial support/relief: shpuld this be on top of 3.2?

4.1.3 Refund from auction proceeds: does this mean "auction profit"?

4.4 Development fund: I've concern that this should be under the direction
of applicants meeting the support criteria only. At least representatives of
the "ICANN community" as well from the ICANN executive management should be
part of the directive body.

4.5 The function of an "External funding agency" is not clear to me.

I hope for clarification and fruitful discussion on the topics.


Kind regards
Wolf-Ulrich