RE: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Fwd: [liaison6c] ICANN Seeks Volunteers

[<tijani.benjemaa@xxxxxxxx>]

I want here to recall that in the JAS WG, we fought to include community 
volunteers in the evaluation panel. We ended with a recommendation for a SARP 
composed of Community members and external experts.

 

While discussing the ASP in the implementation group, I raised the point of 
having some external experts in the SARP, and the answer I got was that inside 
the community, we may find experts, and that it’s not closed, means we may call 
for some experts if needed.

 

Yes, I’m in favor of a hybrid composition, but It’s much better for me to have 
the community members alone than external experts alone. The best is both 
together.

 

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

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

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

 

 

 

De : owner-soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx] De la part de Evan Leibovitch
Envoyé : lundi 13 février 2012 18:20
À : amack
Cc : Avri Doria; soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Objet : Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Fwd: [liaison6c] ICANN Seeks Volunteers

 

I agree with Andrew on all points.

 

I briefly considered applying myself, but recoiled after considering the time 
commitment on top of what I'm already doing here.

 

I recall and strongly agree with the rationale behind not entrusting the 
process to professional consultants. But I also wonder if there's some kind of 
hybrid approach -- an honorarium, perhaps? -- that could address the fact that 
many capable potential applicants have a very real opportunity cost when 
considering participation.

 

At least a nominal payment would also reduce incentives for the SARP members to 
be ... gamed.

 

As for "what pot?" ... as far as I'm concerned, this is a public participation 
issue (in making the explicit move to attract community members to SARP rather 
than hired guns) and should be handled in the budget accordingly. Either that 
or the general gTLD budget. But not from the support pool.

 

Evan Leibovitch

Toronto Canada

Em: evan at telly dot org

Sk: evanleibovitch

Tw: el56





On 13 February 2012 11:46, amack <amack@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Avri,

 

I know I have mentioned on some calls the concern that the time commitments for 
SARP membership is a lot to ask of pure volunteers, and that we may lose many 
of the people that might be best able to do the work.  

 

Not sure I agree with everything Marilyn says (certainly wouldn't want 
evaluators to be sued), but I do think the points have some merit.

 

When Marilyn says "ICANN has the funds to do this", that sounds plausible but 
we wouldn't want the money to come out of the support fund.  So question to the 
entire group: If we wanted to propose a hybrid solution to allow some 
contracting, any ideas as to what pot of money these funds might come from?

 

Thanks, Andrew

 

 

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

Andrew Mack

Principal

AMGlobal Consulting

+1-202-642-6429 <tel:%2B1-202-642-6429> 

amack@xxxxxxxxxxxx

2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First floor 

Washington, DC 20036

www.amglobal.com <http://www.amglobal.com/> 

 

 

From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 20:37:48 -0500
To: <soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Fwd: [liaison6c] ICANN Seeks Volunteers

 

fyi

 

Begin forwarded message:





From: Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Subject: RE: [liaison6c] ICANN Seeks Volunteers

Date: 9 February 2012 20:22:23 EST

To: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>, "liaison6c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" 
<liaison6c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Chuck Gomes <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

 


Avri, thanks. 

 

I understand now, that that was a JAS recommendation, and undoubtedly, many of 
us 'missed' it, as we are all drowning in too much to do, and too many public 
comments on too many topics and issues. 

 

[I was looking for an emoticon with a 'glub, glub, glub' set of rising 
bubbles... but didn't find that. Maybe that is a needed addition to emoticons. ]

 

It is my view that the assessment of applications should be done by retained 
people,who accept a contract; declare no conflicts; and can be fired, or sued, 
if they violate their responsibilities to make fact based, neutral assessments. 
And, they can't be applicants, or advising applicants in any way. Needless to 
say, they also have to sign confidentiality agreements. 

 

I am sorry that this was overlooked, but actually, I think that ICANN staff AND 
the board who review and sign off on proposals like this do have to pay 
attention to such details, and not abdicate accountability and responsibility.  
For ICANN to be respected, and respectable in its integrity it does not have a 
rationale to ignore, or short cut what is considered good practice in 
allocating 'managed resources.'  That is what this is about. 

 

Sometimes we can make uninformed recommendations, and the public comment 
process isn't catching these. 

 

So, I am still of the view: hire people; make them sign a contract; no 
conflicts of interest allowed; and audit their work. That sounds pretty much 
like what ' good practice governance ' requires. 

 

We want an ICANN with integrity; accountability, and auditability. That is also 
a way to ensure fairness in the assessments, so that no one is disadvantaged by 
lack of expertise, or lack of knowledge, or bias that may not be apparent. 
Volunteers are great. I am one. But, volunteers should not run aspects of the 
program like this one. 

 

And, ICANN has the funds to do better than this. I am not suggesting that 
community members cannot apply for the 'jobs', but that volunteers cannot be 
tasked to replace what must be a contracted work assignment. 

 

Marilyn Cade 

 

 

 

> Subject: Re: [liaison6c] ICANN Seeks Volunteers
> From: avri@xxxxxxx
> Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 13:58:01 -0500
> CC: Glen@xxxxxxxxx; liaison6c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> 
> 
> It was part of the JAS recommendation. No one objected in any of the reviews.
> 
> Can't blame ICANN Staff for it though.
> 
> avri
> 
> On 9 Feb 2012, at 08:51, Marilyn Cade wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Using volunteers for this purpose is seriously flawed, and limits 
> > accountability. 
> > 
> > Marilyn Cade
> > Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 23:15:30 
> > To: <liaison6c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: [liaison6c] ICANN Seeks Volunteers
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > February 7, 2012
> > 
> > Volunteers Sought to Help Evaluate Generic Top-Level Domain Applicants 
> > Seeking Financial Support
> > 
> > New Panel Will Help Expand Internet's Reach
> > 
> > 
> > http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-3-03feb12-en.htm<http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-3-03feb12-en.htm>
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Marina del Rey, California. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and 
> > Numbers (ICANN) is seeking volunteers who will assist in the evaluation of 
> > those organizations seeking financial support to apply for a new generic 
> > Top-Level Domain (gTLD).
> > "These volunteers will be key to ICANN's effort to assure that the 
> > less-developed parts of the world are able to participate in the new Domain 
> > name program," said Kurt Pritz, Senior Vice President. "The panel members 
> > will make a real impact in ensuring that the opportunities for innovation 
> > and economic development created by the Internet are open to everyone." 
> > The volunteers will be chosen for their background and experience in areas 
> > such as running a small business, operating in developing economies, 
> > analyzing business plans, serving in the public interest, managing a domain 
> > name registry service, or awarding grants.
> > The financial assistance component of the Applicant Support Program offers 
> > a limited number of qualifying applicants the opportunity to pay a reduced 
> > evaluation fee of $47,000 instead of the full evaluation fee of $185,000.
> > The selected volunteers will assist in the evaluation of financial support 
> > applicants in the context of established public interest, financial 
> > capabilities and financial need criteria as outlined in the "Financial 
> > Assistance Handbook 
> > <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/candidate-support/financial-assistance-handbook-11jan12-en.pdf>
> >  ." 
> > Those who are interested in applying, should review the criteria, time 
> > commitment and other expectations, which are detailed here: 
> > http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/candidate-support/sarp-eoi-request-03feb12-en.pdf
> > ### 
> > * To learn more about the Applicant Support Program, go here: 
> > http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/candidate-support.
> > 
> > * To read the New gTLD Financial Assistance Handbook, go here: 
> > http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/candidate-support/financial-assistance-handbook-11jan12-en.pdf
> >  
> > 
> > * To learn more about the New gTLD program, go here: 
> > http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/about/program/materials
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Glen de Saint Géry
> > GNSO Secretariat
> > gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
> > http://gnso.icann.org
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 

 

 

  _____  

Aucun virus trouvé dans ce message.
Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
Version: 10.0.1390 / Base de données virale: 1518/3785 - Date: 24/07/2011
La Base de données des virus a expiré.