RE: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Friday's meeting

[<tijani.benjemaa@xxxxxxxx>]

Dear all,

 

As for Carlton questions, I think you are talking about the JAS support
program name. If it’s so, I propose the name of “Applicant Support Program”.

I don’t see why we use the “evaluation” word, except if you mean the
evaluation panel process name, 

 

Developing counties – developing economies – poor communities, etc. Even if
I agree that there are poor communities in the rich countries, I still
prefer to stick to “developing countries” because as you all know, except
for the rejected (punished) communities of certain rich countries who are
really excluded from the economic and social life, the poor people of the
developed countries are rich compared to the developing countries’
populations. In the resolution 20, it was said that the aim is to make the
new gTLD program inclusive and the developing countries were mentioned. My
concern is to see applicants from developing countries excluded from the
support program and others from the developed countries accepted, which will
make the new gTLD program not inclusive, and only (or almost) rich countries
will benefit from this industry.

So I propose to use “developing countries and poor and excluded
communities”.

 

As Alan said, the criteria are the keys of the gate to the support program.
If an applicant passes those criteria, he/she is candidate to one (or more)
kind of support.

 

As it was meant by the first and the second milestone reports, the fee
reduction we detailed applies for all needy applicants. We explained why it
will not be in contradiction with the cost recovery condition, and thus, it
shouldn’t be repaid to ICANN. So, the fee reduction we are advocating for
will be apart from the 2 million funds.

 

----------------------------------------------------------

Tijani BEN JEMAA

Executive Director

Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations

Phone : + 216 70 825 231

Mobile : + 216 98 330 114

Fax     : + 216 70 825 231

----------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

-----Message d'origine-----
De : owner-soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx] De la part de Alan Greenberg
Envoyé : vendredi 29 juillet 2011 06:26
À : JAS
Objet : [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Friday's meeting

 

 

I have not seen an announcement of the meeting tomorrow, or a draft agenda,
but I presume that it is still on.

 

I have been trying to pull together a document of financial criteria, and
and there has been some substantive discussion going on on the mailing list.

 

I would like some time on the agenda to get the sense of the group (and of
staff!) of several issues:

 

- Concept of two phase review: 1st on objective criteria, and those that
pass are subject to a more subjective review. I like the concept, but am
beginning to feel that the objective criteria will have to be so loose as to
have little meaning, or so tight as to exclude most everyone. An example is
the $100k max and $70k minimum annual profit that we previously talked
about. That would have limited acceptable applicant to those with profit of
$71k-$99k - a rather small range and one that did not apply to many business
models. Is this really viable.

 

- Issue of whether we are advocating a base flat fee reduction or not. If
so, does this come out of the $2m + matching funds?

 

- Is the cost of administering this program funded by the same $2m +
matching funds?

 

- We have been talking about repayment. Will this be mandatory (that is, the
business plan must allow for it)?

 

Alan

 

 

-----

Aucun virus trouvé dans ce message.

Analyse effectuée par AVG -  <http://www.avg.fr> www.avg.fr

Version: 10.0.1390 / Base de données virale: 1518/3785 - Date: 24/07/2011