Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Review of draft report

[Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>]

Due to the complexity of commenting, I will use e-mail for this one 
issue where there is very substantive disagreement with what Avri and 
I have said, specifically how to fund the fee reduction.
The main point I was making is that the fee reduction be funded from 
auction proceeds, but that failing the materialization of that, the 
reduction can still be funded without impacting the operational 
cost-recovery of the new gTLD program by deferring the return to 
reserve of the pre-program development costs. I feel that this last 
part is important, because the Board is likely to be risk-adverse and 
may not want to spend money on the assumption (but not guarantee) 
that there would be auction proceeds.
I believe that my presentation is a bit simpler, and is likely to 
result in less confusion over exactly what is being proposed.
All of that being said, I can live with Avri's proposal, but think 
that it is likely to be rejected due to confusion, which is not a good thing.
Alan

Regarding Avri's definition of short-term, I don't really think short 
term cash flow is a problem, since ICANN will be receiving the full 
fee in advance for all non-supported application. They will be very cash-rich.
Alan

At 21/08/2011 01:41 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> Hi,
>
> That is weird.  I see the same thing you do on reopening it.
> Now sure how or why this happened.  I just added words inside your 
> comments.  though i did add highlight to my comments to make sure 
> they stood out from yours (since they were under your comment heading)
> in any case i brought it into OpenOffice Used Word for MAC to 
> comment) and could read them fine.  But it dropped the highlight - 
> that is why I think it may be the culprit that tickled the word bug)
> Here is an odt and pdf version.
>
> a.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 21 Aug 2011, at 12:54, Alan Greenberg wrote:
>
> >
> > Avri, for some reason, in the Word document, the comments have 
> all been reduced to some infinitesimal font that I cannot read - it 
> still says they are 10 pt, but are not. If you don't know what did 
> this, perhaps you can convert to a PDF so I can read it?
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > At 21/08/2011 11:26 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I have added comments to all of your comments.  I have attached 
> a version with my comments added to yours.
> >>
> >> Also, I had done my own review - although I did it by adding 
> sticky notes on the PDF version of the file. I did not move those 
> comments over to your review.  I have attached that as well.
> >>
> >> a.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 20 Aug 2011, at 20:11, Alan Greenberg wrote:
> >>
> >> > I have reviewed the most recent copy of the report prepared by 
> Rob and Seth, and a copy with my comments are attached.
> >> >
> >> > There are a number of comments which are substantive and it 
> would be very useful to know to what extent others agree or disagree with them.
> >> >
> >> > Regards, Alan<Draft_Final_Report_JASWG_20110818_Reordered, clean-ag.doc>
> >
> >