[soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Adobe Connect - Chat Transcript from JAS WG July 29 Meeting

[Karla Valente <karla.valente@xxxxxxxxx>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Karla.Valente@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:Karla.Valente@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 7:15 AM
To: Karla Valente
Subject: Adobe Connect - Chat Transcript from Joint SO/AC WG on New gTLD 
Applicant Support

  CLO:thanks 
  Carlton Samuels:Hi everyone
  Karla Valente:dear all. Apologies for the roll call. having issues with my 
outlook
  Krista Papac:Hello everyone
  CLO:Hi there
  CLO: surely this information can be analysed  i.e.  at  
https://mail-attachment.googleusercontent.com/attachment?ui=2&ik=e35917fca1&view=att&th=13173a02a88542bd&attid=0.1&disp=inline&safe=1&zw&sadnir=1&saduie=AG9B_P-YPkmkgBmravzFmTP4Oo01&sadet=1311940743828&sads=Fk-4J6BTzaGSjohu4lElnCQLrBE&sadssc=1
    and     
https://mail-attachment.googleusercontent.com/attachment?ui=2&ik=e35917fca1&view=att&th=13173a02a88542bd&attid=0.2&disp=inline&safe=1&zw&sadssc=1&sadnir=2&saduie=AG9B_P-YPkmkgBmravzFmTP4Oo01&sadet=1311940743826&sads=0qqg2QZftkr9mEAIEBHrUY_D1yc
  CLO:these arr the recent  flow  pojt / process diagrams  distributed in a 
recent email to the lisst by Karla
  Eric Brunner-Williams:interesting example, kurt's application to a state 
school for funding (tax forms, etc.) and to an additional source of funding 
(essay question).
  Carlton Samuels:@Eric:  Aaah, interesting process breakdwn you have noted!
  Carlton Samuels:@CLO: +1.  A few of these must be definitive and available 
for inclusion in the guidebook as well!
  CLO:I also find it a bit of a *giggle*   that parts of ICANN establishrd 
community  csn not be given "dicretion"  to spend tiny amounts of  "ICANNs 
Money" and heree I'm talking allocation of  a few hundred  dollars  yet  a  
volunteer panel  (inclusive of some of those same community leads)  can  be 
proposed to make these needy AS  go no go calls  So  the OBJECTIVITY issue is 
going to be essential here....
  Alan Greenberg:+CLO - agreed
  Eric Brunner-Williams:excuse me? is "objective criteria" the only means to 
ensure that the process is not captured by applicants from developed 
economies???
  CLO:perhaps  as Tijani is pointing out rather thsn the exact examples of 
threshold  that we discussed and did not pursue  is worth revisiting as the 
need to *some established*   upper and lower financial rescources threshold(s)  
to be used  If so then these need to be clear and flagged from the VERY start 
of any published  process....  well before any Go Live...
  Alan Greenberg:If we need objective criteria. SOMEONE needs to develop them, 
and so far we have proven unable to do that. We need to address WHO.
  Alan Greenberg:Kurt, will staff be able to work with a recommendation that 
there be a first objective criteria filter, but one that we do not develop (ie 
that ICANN implementation team needs to).
  Andrew Mack:hello everyone.  apologies for being late
  Eric Brunner-Williams:i offered a minimum financial capability criteria, in 
the interest of identifying applicants that are capable of success, with 
support. 
  Alan Greenberg:Anderew, are you willing to accept that these external 
professional evaluators are paid for out of the $2M+ fund?
  Eric Brunner-Williams:the problem with "financial records" is that legal 
entities will be formed specifically for the purpose of applying -- this is a 
problem that icann has considered so i'll ask kurt -- and evaluation of the 
applicant's financial representations means attempting to "look beyond the 
corporate form".
  Krista Papac:+1 Andrew. 
  Carlton Samuels:@Kurt:  The PROCESS laid down is the KEY requirement.  We 
know we will need some objective and some subjective criteria.  The way to get 
this thru is to create an appropriate process and recognize that in 
evaluations,  we must put the needle at the 'right' place betwwen use of 
objective and subjective criteria
  Rafik:@clo can yu please repeat what you are asking the co-chairs to do :)?
  Carlton Samuels:@ERic:  Again, he's recognizing a real limitation of 
across-the-board use of financial records as 'objective criteria'! 
  Andrew Mack:Alan, sorry just saw this.  As I've said from the beginning, $2M 
is inadequate for our task exactly for this reason -- we need resources to both 
build and run a viable system, as well as to support applicants.  That said, if 
we need getting expertise to help make the system work seems like a worthy -- 
even necessary -- expenditure.  
  CLO:Co Chairs  need to hear reasurance of WHAT WE  (JAS)  need to do 
establish in finaite terms  and how much can be delimiters  and more generic  
constraints  etc.,   so WE  JAS-WG  do not waste our  time on these IMPORTANT 
issues For this Final Report   .... Obviously  post report and post Dakar  
there is more work to be done  as lon as we can  assure it  will/ can be 
addressed in a timeley manner and resourced for useful outcome  then  that is 
OK as well...
  Rafik:@clo thank you for clarification
  Carlton Samuels:@CLO:  I've asked Karla to post the outline draft of the 
Finbal Report on the wiki....
  Carlton Samuels:and we intend to have a process that addresses that exct 
question also unfurled!
  Karla Valente:I will post an initial draft of the final report on the wiki 
shortly.
  Alex Gakuru:Another way of establishing Olivier's "filter" we may consider 
would be to ask all interested applicants to first submit a brief "concept 
note" and if that meets our pre-defined objective criteria then stage 1 
qualifying applicants can be asked to submit a substansive application. This is 
the approach donor agencies and academic paper submission takes. just a 
thought... 
  Andrew Mack:One more thought Alan -- if we are trying to raise additional 
funds, showing we have a system that works (that we want to take to scale) will 
be key, so yes, I suppose paying for that expertise may be a necessary and even 
wise investment
  Carlton Samuels:@Karla:  Many thanks....
  CLO:See  we do not want  to have JAS applicants  doing thing twice either  or 
we increase the barriers  to their entry not reduce them
  Eric Brunner-Williams:thank you for the response kurt.
  Carlton Samuels:@Alex:  +1 to that!  Afterall, in our world this is exactly 
what obtains
  Rafik:@andrew how much icann should spend in such inestment to get the 
expertise?
  Krista Papac:Another good point CLO 
  CLO:basically  once you are a JAS  then *in an ideal owrld*  once you enter 
the  neww gTLD  phase there shiuld be NO (or minimal at best) difference 
between treatment essessment even identity of a JAS applicant  or a biggest 
brand in the world  type
  Eric Brunner-Williams:recommendation 20 did not identify "objective criteria" 
as a goal, only assistance to applicants from developing countries, which we've 
generalized to developing economies, and diversity.
  Alan Greenberg:WRT KUrt,  I think that our criteria (defining poverty!) will 
be equally fuzzy.
  Carlton Samuels:I'm knocked off!
  Andrew Mack:Rafik, I don't know the right amount of $$ to spend, but do think 
we need to get the job done.
  Alan Greenberg:WhTijani, you and others are saying that we need objective 
criteria as the first filter. I am hearng from Kurt that this may not be 
possible without losing many good applicants.
  Rafik:@alan how much objective is this "objective criteria" :)?
  CLO:and IF we ask for it to be paid for then does THAT come out of the "new 
fund/pot" or in  "normal" ICANN cost of program ///
  Eric Brunner-Williams:i disagree with tijani's representation that "we need 
objective criteria". this is argued to be necessary to implement "assistance" 
consistent with recommendation 20, but it isn't the only way to implement 
"assistance" consistent with recommendation 20.
  Carlton Samuels:@Alan:  This is my worry with the objective criteria 
question.  How and where it is in play and what weight we assign to it! 
  Rafik:@carlton my understanding that objective criteria are more weighted 
than subjective and then we have risk to lose a lot of prospective applicants
  Alan Greenberg:I am happy with identifying criteria to be considered. I am 
questioing whether can use such criteria as an absolute filter (ie if you don't 
meet them, you are out).
  Carlton Samuels:@Eric:  +1
  Carlton Samuels:@Rafik:  Yes, that is my fear
  Alan Greenberg:I have worked on selection of such projects, and my impression 
is that it is a VERY subjective process.
  Rafik:@alan you mean that objective label is something subjective :)?
  Alan Greenberg:WE can ask for specific objective numbers, but I do not 
beleive that we should use them to arbitrarily include or exclude applicants. 
It is just part of the mosaic that needs to be evaluated.
  Eric Brunner-Williams:i'd like to ask another question of kurt
  Alan Greenberg:@ Eric, I would hope that such recommendation (reduce the 
North American requirements) are ones that we should be making.
  Carlton Samuels:@Alan:  I'm still surprised that this was not picked up from 
Kurt's example...and Eric's attempt to tease out a response by breaking down 
the process of Kurt's example
  Tijani:I totaly desagree with Alan
  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:Objective Criteria as a first filter YES; As a go / 
no-go final decision, NO.
  Alan Greenberg:Tijani, I am happy to use your model, but if we use it, we 
need to be specific about what we can use for such filters, and to date, I have 
not heard any that the group can support.
  Tijani:if you prefer to let evaluator decide with out any element of 
objective evaluation
  Carlton Samuels:@CLO +1.   Keep our eyes on the prize. Could NOT have said it 
better.
  Tijani:it will be the complaisance
  Rafik:@olivier using it as filter mean that some applicnats will be excluded 
before going into the whole process, there is risk of discriminate interesting 
applications
  Tijani:and no fair result can be expected
  Rafik:@tijani and using "objective" criteria can be unfair too
  Alex Gakuru:+1
  Karla Valente:I just posted on teh Wiki the initial draft final report and a 
proposed schedule for the content review.
  CLO:Thanks  Karla
  Carlton Samuels:@Karla Thanks much
  Carlton Samuels:I have to go.....defending my course curriculum to the 
committee this am
  CLO:Good luck  Carlton
  Carlton Samuels:Thanks!
  kurt:good luck Carelton
  kurt:Carlton
  Carlton Samuels:@CLO: Many thanks for attempting to keep us all 'honest' here!
  Rafik:@carlton colleague take it easy :)
  Carlton Samuels:@Rafik:  Thank you sir.  Busy morning for you :-)
  Eric Brunner-Williams:when looking for examples, the peculiarities of this 
particular project -- the specific subject matter expertise -- must not be 
overlooked. for example, an applicant with little current resources, but the 
intent to exploit defensive buys (the "first $1m"), is not the same as an 
applicant with more current resources, and a policy of non-exploitation of 
defensive buys. 
  kurt:I have to go on, sorry - next meeting we can review flow chart if you 
want; also - if you would please discuss how we can help move criteria writing 
forward
  Eric Brunner-Williams:so a critical issue is identifying the "envelop" of 
credible resource expenditures by applicants, and the credible resource 
provisioning.
  Rafik:thank you kurt
  CLO:Thanks Kurt  Talk soon then   ;-)
  Eric Brunner-Williams:bye kurt
  Alex Gakuru:Thanks Kurt
  Andrew Mack:bye Kurt and thanks all.  
  Andrew Mack:gotta go.  take care everyone
  CLO:Bye  all I am unsure about my ability to join next Tue  so IF I miss that 
call please note my apologies  as I say not sure....
  Alex Gakuru:bye all
  Rafik:@clo noted and you will be missed for sure :)