[soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Fwd: [] Information on New gTLD Applicant Support Program

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Wanted to let the JAS WG know about the plans for a ALAC New gTLD WG (ANgWG) 
meeting to be held on  19 Dec at 1400 UTC (details below).  All members of the 
JAS WG are invited to participate in this meeting.  The primary topic will be a 
discussion on the draft Implementation plan the Board/Staff Implementation team 
have created in response to the JAS WG final report.

I have also included a forward of a note that was sent to the ANgWG that 
discusses the plan for the meeting.

avri

> The next gTLD Working Group teleconference is scheduled for Monday 19
> December 2011 at 1400 UTC.
> 
> 
> 
> For various times see:
> 
> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=New+gTLDs+WG+
> <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=New+gTLDs+WG+&iso=
> 20111219T14> &iso=20111219T14
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The agenda ( TO BE UPDATED) and call details can be found at:
> 
> https://community.icann.org/x/QoTbAQ
> 
> 
> 
> If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff at:
> 
> <mailto:staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx%3cmailto:staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] Information on New gTLD Applicant Support Program
> Date: 15 December 2011 23:54:21 EST
> To: At-Large GTLD WG List <gtld-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I have forwarded Tijani's message on to Kurt Pritz  and Chris Disspain as 
> requested.  I also indicated that the WG was still reviewing the material and 
> would have other, more formal comments later, but given the statement they 
> made of being about to release the documents for community review, I wanted 
> them to see the issues Tijani brought up beforehand.
> 
> On issues, since there is an upcoming ALAC meeting, if this group wishes to 
> have ALAC send the Board advice on these materials, we would need to send a 
> draft note of what we recommend they say by Tuesday.
> 
> What I propose is that people use the next 24 hours to submit comments they 
> have on the materials to this list.  Over the weekend I will attempt to 
> create a draft that summarizes the concerns made in those contributions and 
> in other comments I have read on At-Large mailing lists related to the 
> Board's resolutions.  At Monday's meeting we can discuss the issue of whether 
> we want to recommend that ALAC send a letter and the content of a letter.
> 
> Please feel free to discuss this on the list over the next days.
> 
> Thanks
> avri
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 15 Dec 2011, at 07:35, <tijani.benjemaa@xxxxxxxx> 
> <tijani.benjemaa@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> Dear Avri and all,
>> 
>> I apologize for the late input. I hope it is not too late to submit comments 
>> to the implementation group prior to the launch of the public comment period.
>> 
>> As for the evaluation process, I would like to emphasize on the compulsory 
>> nature of the criterion number 2 (Financial need). And to make it clear, I 
>> propose that the 3rd paragraph of item 3 of the criteria document be 
>> modified as follow:
>> 
>> To meet the threshold, support applications must score:
>>      • 4 of 7 points on the first criteria set, and
>>      • 3 of 5 points on the second criteria set, and
>>      • 1 of 2 points on the third criteria set.
>> 
>> Any support applicant who scores less than 4 for criterion # 1 wouldn’t be 
>> select regardless the total score he/she collect.
>> Any support applicant who scores less than 3 for criterion # 2 wouldn’t be 
>> select regardless the total score he/she collect.
>> Any support applicant who scores less than 1 for criterion # 3 wouldn’t be 
>> select regardless the total score he/she collect.
>> 
>> As for criterion # 1, I believe that its weight is too high and needs to be 
>> reduced. Thus, I propose the following modifications:  
>> 1.       Remove the “Advocated by non‐profit,… “
>> 2.       Modify this paragraph as follow:
>> Operated or sponsored by a not‐for‐profit organization (0--‐1 points)
>> Priority will be given to entities that are not formed as conventional 
>> for-profit businesses, i.e. non-governmental organizations, non‐profit 
>> entities, civil society organizations, foundations, trusts, mission-based 
>> organizations, etc. ……………. Non‐profit organizations and similarly organized 
>> entities …….. are eligible for 1 points; other organizations will receive 0 
>> point.
>> 
>> The total score for Criterion 1 after this change will be 7.
>> 
>> Also, I would like that the composition of the SARP be clarified; my 
>> preference goes to a panel made of members from the community and external 
>> experts.
>> 
>> It’s not clear if the support candidates will pay the $ 5,000 of the TAS or 
>> if they will pay the total $ 47,000 at the online registration.
>> 
>> The reduced application fees of $ 47,000 will not be returned to the 
>> applicant if the SARP doesn’t select him. This is a very big problem because 
>> we are dealing with needy applicants, and $ 47,000 means a lot for a needy 
>> applicant (think of a community from Bangladesh). So, this needs to be 
>> modified so that the applicant be refunded.
>> 
>> The lack of objective criteria makes the evaluation too subjective, and one 
>> of the most important priorities for the implementation group is to find out 
>> a set of objective criteria (as mentioned in the JAS final report) to help 
>> the SARP in giving support to the right applicants.   
>> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GTLD-WG mailing list
> GTLD-WG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
> 
> Working Group direct URL: 
> https://st.icann.org/gnso-liaison/index.cgi?new_gtld_policy