[soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Chat Transcript JAS WG - New gTLD Applicant Support September 9

[Karla Valente <karla.valente@xxxxxxxxx>]

Karla Valente
Director, gTLD Registry Programs
Mobile:  +1 310 936 4639  


-----Original Message-----
From: Karla.Valente@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:Karla.Valente@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 8:07 AM
To: Karla Valente
Subject: Adobe Connect - Chat Transcript from Joint SO/AC WG on New gTLD 
Applicant Support

  Karla Valente:Welcome to the JAS WG September 9 Meeting
  Seth Greene:Link to the text and comments to be reviewed today:  
https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/22970578/Draft_Final_Report_JASWG_20110906+%28RHv3SGv3%29%28clean%29%5B1%5D.doc
  Seth Greene:In above, the comments to be reviewed are attached to pars. 33, 
42, 67b (final bullet), 67d and 68d.  
  Karla Valente:@Rafik - thank you for your input on the webinar date. to 
confirm the date is September  16, invitations to be sent to SO/AC, posted on 
the homepage. I still need to know who will present/speak on the webinar.
  Carlton Samuels:Hi Everyone
  CLO:I would prefer  Financial Support  term  OVER  payment of fees
  Alan Greenberg:Agree.
  Cintra Sooknanan:hello everyone
  Alan Greenberg:Please don't turn hands to microphones. It, among other 
things, loses the speaker request order.
  Robert Hoggarth:its not me either!  :-)
  Alan Greenberg:Don't care who it was. But either we have gremlins or someone 
here is doing it.
  avri:i am fine with rough consensus against and some support
  avri:senior people?  we differentiate between senior people and junior people?
  Evan Leibovitch:I certainly do never recall a consensus that bundling was now 
a JAS issue
  Evan Leibovitch:not
  Andrew Mack:Tijani, the idea of bundling was as a support for IDNs
  Evan Leibovitch:There was no consensus on having bundling. But neither is 
there consensus that this is not a JAS issue.
  Alan Greenberg:We seem to have agreement on what it can say. If so, we just 
need to get the words right.
  Evan Leibovitch:Wording should simply state: "Some members of the WG have 
advocated for [...] but this position did not attract consensus."
  Evan Leibovitch:Or... I am fine with the original wording.
  avri:i am fine with rough consensus against including bundling as a JAS 
solution but some support for including it.
  CLO:former language  is OK
  Evan Leibovitch:I don't like negative points of agreement (ie, "consensus 
against") ... that's just clumsy wording
  Alan Greenberg:Evan, at this point, clumsy is ok if we all agree on the 
content.
  Cintra Sooknanan:I am raising a new point
  Cintra Sooknanan:so if evan is continuting to speak on this then please take 
his point first
  Evan Leibovitch:I strongly disagree with Avri's wording
  Andrew Mack:I disagree with Avri as well.  I don't think this is correct.
  Andrew Mack:There are a few that are strongly against, and a few that are 
strongly in favor.  
  Evan Leibovitch:I do not agree that there is consensus against, but neither 
is there consensus for. You know, there is a concept that says "the group was 
divided on the issue" that is perfectly valid.
  Seth Greene:"Rough Consensus" and "Near Consensus" are defined in Glossary as 
the same -- but Report text (most often) uses "Near Consensus."  The definition 
of both in Glossary:  A large majority, but not all, WG members back a 
recommendation.
  avri:Andrew, i beleive this is historical revisionism
  Cintra Sooknanan:There was significant support and significant opposition 
with regard to bundling
  avri:contra, I do not beleive this is true.
  avri:Apologies, Cintra
  Cintra Sooknanan:no problem
  avri:It is at the end of the day for the the chairs to decide
  Cintra Sooknanan:was it a minority view.. in light of the letter signed?
  Evan Leibovitch:+1 Carlton
  Evan Leibovitch:I'm OK with Robert's mods
  avri:there was persistent minority support, but when you check the size of 
the group it is not strong.
  Cintra Sooknanan:Tijani are you saying that we should include a reasoning 
with each perspective?
  Evan Leibovitch:Yes. That's what "minority support means", If it *was* strong 
it would be "strong support" :-)
  Carlton Samuels 2:Thank you Tijani!
  Evan Leibovitch:At a certain point we need to move on
  Evan Leibovitch:"strong minority"? sheesh.
  Evan Leibovitch:Jumbo shrimp
  Carlton Samuels 2:@Evan: Sheesh indeed!
  Cintra Sooknanan:lol
  Carlton Samuels 2:lololol
  Alan Greenberg:@EvanL YUMMIE!
  Andrew Mack:I will take this as a compliment Avri
  Andrew Mack:I can accept Rob's language.  Can we move on?
  avri:Andrew: you are a great advocate.
  Evan Leibovitch:do we really need to go into the negatives? "A minority 
expressed a wish to [...]" and leave it at that.
  Andrew Mack:and Avri, you are a tenacious opponent.  but its time to reach 
agreement
  Evan Leibovitch:THIS IMPLIES MAJORITY AGAINST.
  Cintra Sooknanan:I dont' think so
  Cintra Sooknanan:both
  Cintra Sooknanan:strong persistent
  avri:i prefer persistent but can live with this.  
  Evan Leibovitch:I still think this is supremely dumb on a conceptual basis 
(asserting a negative consensus) but not enough to prevent moving forward,
  Cintra Sooknanan:fine by me
  Evan Leibovitch:Note: EVERYTHING that survives drafts into the final report 
is, by definition, "persistent"
  Tijani:Avri, I think Andrew is strongly interested in the bundling
  Tijani:iand then he keep advocating even if he was the only one 
  Alan Greenberg:Tijani is correct. If we say reduce the period, we don't need 
to give a figure.
  Seth Greene:Alan, I believe your point was simply moved to par. 4.  Talke a 
look.
  Alan Greenberg:I don't feel strongly about Cintra's change, but I can 
certainly live with it.
  Andrew Mack:instead of residing for companies, Cintra, would domiciled work?
  avri:i agree with CLO
  avri:lets not add ICANn propoganda slogans to the JAS report
  Andrew Mack:Ha Avri.  I have to leave for another call.  Thank you for the 
hard work -- both where we agree and when we agree slightly less. 
  Carlton Samuels 2:@CLO: Yes, the intent was paragraph numbers  not survive to 
publication!
  avri:as to the issue of the final dociment deviating from the milestone 
report, it might be worth adding a line that say something like:  in areas 
where this report deviates from the prior milestone reports, it is general y 
due to responsidng to comments received on those milesotne reports.
  Carlton Samuels 2:but @Rob
  Carlton Samuels 2:I can accept the rationale
  Cintra Sooknanan:thank you for reviewing my suggestions, I did not finish the 
document but will send some other suggestions via the list
  Cintra Sooknanan:but the paragraph numbers have to make sense!
  Cintra Sooknanan:which they don't exactly do right now
  Carlton Samuels 2:Too late is the cry! Paras goes
  Cintra Sooknanan:;p
  Cintra Sooknanan:thanks. Rafik... I suspect my comments will be along that 
line
  Karla Valente:webiinar to be scheduled for September 16. Will send 
invitations to SO/AC. Need to know who will be the speaker(s). 
  Cintra Sooknanan:just tightening the language
  Alan Greenberg:I've got to go. Is there a follow-on meeting for this WG, or 
is this the last meeting?
  Rafik:@alan it is already late :)
  Alan Greenberg:LAst meeting prior to any implementation work I guess?
  Karla Valente:webinar speakers so far.... Carlton, Rafik, Avri
  Karla Valente:@Avri: I will draft a presentation to help
  Rafik:WG calls we may continue as we have to reply to public comments
  Alan Greenberg:ok. Leaving now. Thanks to all for getting us this far.
  Karla Valente:will we have a meeting on Tuesday to discuss summary analyssi 
second milestone report and the webinar?
  avri:ok, consider me as having been successfully volunteered
  Karla Valente:presentation - ppt. presenters Avri, Carlton, Rafik; other WG 
JAS members help with Q&A at the end of the session - 30 minutes for Q&A
  CLO:Avri and Alan  as  Co presenters  Karla  then the rest is  fine
  CLO:and  Yes  I will contribute   and be there for Q&A
  Karla Valente:Alan and Avri as presented. noted.
  Karla Valente:other WG members for Q&A
  avri:i am fine with any time.  i will nap before and after.
  avri:i have decided that all days are 48 hours long and that they overlap 
with the day before and the day after to some extent.
  Carlton Samuels 2:@Avri: Bless u! 
  Carlton Samuels 2::D
  Karla Valente: so we have 12 UTC and 22 UTC?
  avri:oh that is a normal day
  Karla Valente:can we do: 12 UTC – September 16th 22 UTC – September 19th 
  Karla Valente:webinar will be 12 and 22 UTC – September 19th 
  CLO:Note  My apoligies 13th  as I'll be in the ccNSO Council meeting  Thanks
  Cintra Sooknanan:thank you Rafik
  Cintra Sooknanan:bye all