Re: [ALAC] Fwd: For your review - proposed charter new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG
Please note that we need any concerns raised with utmost haste. Alan At 27/09/2016 12:31 AM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
Somehow this got lost and never went to the ALAC. We will clearly not meet the deadline, but I have said we would reply as soon as possible.
A bit of background. As the draft Charter says, the work of the CCWG will not be to allocate funds, but to develop a process for doing this. A lot of work has gone into the draft charter, and I believe that it is close to ready. There are many constraints on what the funds can be used for based on the ICANN Bylaws, and given the amount of money (currently $235,000,000 if the .web auction stands) conflict of interest is a very serious matter.
Please get any comments to me by the end of Monday at the very latest.
Of crucial importance are matters of substance which would stop the ALAC from ratifying the charter. If you find typos and such, please let me know but that is not the focus.
Alan
Subject: For your review - proposed charter new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 16:41:28 +0000
Sending on behalf of Jonathan Robinson, new gTLD Auction Proceeds Drafting Team Chair & Alan Greenberg, DT Vice-Chair:
Dear SO/AC Chairs,
On behalf of the new gTLD Auction Proceeds Drafting Team (DT), we are delighted to submit to you and your respective SO/ACs, the proposed charter for a Cross-Community Working Group on new gTLD Auction Proceeds. As you may recall, representatives of all ICANN SO/ACs, apart from the ccNSO (which decided not to take part in the DT effort), participated in the DT deliberations (see <https://community.icann.org/x/AR_AAw>https://community.icann.org/x/AR_AAw for DT members).
This proposed charter is the result of extensive input and deliberations, including careful review of input that was received as part of the cross-community session at ICANN 56 in Helsinki (see <https://community.icann.org/x/fgmbAw)>https://community.icann.org/x/fgmbAw) and we believe it now represents a careful balance between the different viewpoints and perspectives, including from both the DT Members and the ICANN Board liaisons to the DT. As such, the DT would like to request you review the proposed charter with this careful balance in mind and only flag to the DT any pertinent issues that would prevent your respective SO/AC from adopting this charter. We would like to request you highlight such pertinent issues by 30 September 2016 at the latest, including an indication of when you anticipate your respective SO/AC to be in a position to consider the charter for adoption following 30 September, provided that no pertinent issues have been identified by any of the ICANN SO/ACs.
Of course, should you have any clarifying questions, please do not hesitate to respond to this message. The DT looks forward to receiving your feedback.
Best wishes,
Jonathan Robinson, DT Chair & Alan Greenberg, DT Vice-Chair Content-Type: application/msword; name="CCWG Auction Proceeds - clean - FINAL Charter - 9 September 2016.doc"; x-mac-type=42494E41; x-mac-creator=4D535744 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="CCWG Auction Proceeds - clean - FINAL Charter - 9 September" 2016.doc" X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
1;DM5PR03MB2714;9:1gmqnEhp7gkCouELrLqnZyNOqReRcVRm6NYT5thEWR36TD1tnCgjJL/PlgcB0SdatHpmKhDmZUbEzBvB6AoEKNqG9VjIUmW9DThrIu0Ejx92/6ruy0N4kEDXc395WldzfI+EmEZ/j5DSERwf9MzBb6FpVQCUVJAwJoqLlFub9ytahPHLevWmvt5o86/ZV60BYHI0UPGqpLgrMu/0Cv25xQ==
Content-Type: application/pdf; name="CCWG Auction Proceeds - clean - FINAL Charter - 9 September 2016.pdf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="CCWG Auction Proceeds - clean - FINAL Charter - 9 September" 2016.pdf" X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
1;DM5PR03MB2714;9:1gmqnEhp7gkCouELrLqnZyNOqReRcVRm6NYT5thEWR36TD1tnCgjJL/PlgcB0SdatHpmKhDmZUbEzBvB6AoEKNqG9VjIUmW9DThrIu0Ejx92/6ruy0N4kEDXc395WldzfI+EmEZ/j5DSERwf9MzBb6FpVQCUVJAwJoqLlFub9ytahPHLevWmvt5o86/ZV60BYHI0UPGqpLgrMu/0Cv25xQ==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
1;DM5PR03MB2714;9:1gmqnEhp7gkCouELrLqnZyNOqReRcVRm6NYT5thEWR36TD1tnCgjJL/PlgcB0SdatHpmKhDmZUbEzBvB6AoEKNqG9VjIUmW9DThrIu0Ejx92/6ruy0N4kEDXc395WldzfI+EmEZ/j5DSERwf9MzBb6FpVQCUVJAwJoqLlFub9ytahPHLevWmvt5o86/ZV60BYHI0UPGqpLgrMu/0Cv25xQ==
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
Overall type of projects to be funded will be decided by the CCWG (if it indeed makes any such restrictions). Adherence to the ICANN Mission and Goals will be a pre-requisite. Detailed funding decisions will be the job of the process/infrastructure recommended by the CCWG and approved by the Board. Your specific suggestion will surely be up to the latter body. Conflict of interest guidelines will explicitly preclude CCWG members advocating specific projects that they may later be submitting. I cannot imagine the ALAC doing anything other than to have one CCWG Member per region, chosen according to our normal processes which will include a wide-spread call for Expressions of Interest.This is what we have always done before and regional balance is the reason that the process allows five Members per AC/SO. Alan At 30/09/2016 01:06 PM, Judith Hellerstein wrote:
HI Allan,
Thanks for passing this on to us for comments. I think it is fine and wide enough in the community benefits for some of the projects we would like to accomplish. One thought I had would be to expand the fellowship to disadvantaged communities in North America and Europe and other developed countries which are not able to obtain funding to attend ICANN meetings. Also to do more outreach to these communities and create special programs for these and others who have been left out, including the urban poor, rural and remote rural, people with disabilities and specific needs, indigenous communities/ We could target more of these communities and work to increase engagement. I see this in line with ICANN's mission
I do note that once this charter is approved than the CCWG will be open to others to join. Will there be a call out for people to be appointed like we had for the BCEC and BPMPC?
Participation in the CCWG, and its sub-teams (should these be created), is open to Chartering Organization appointed Members, participants and observers. Members are appointed by the Chartering Organizations in accordance with their own rules and procedures. Each Chartering Organization shall appoint a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 5 Members. I suggest we use all five and have one from each RALO appointed. Others can then join in as participants as it says below
I note the following: Chartering Organizations are encouraged to use open and inclusive processes when selecting their members for a CCWG and this should include reasonable efforts to ensure that each of ICANN's five regions is represented.
In addition, the CCWG will be open to any interested person as a Participant. Participants may be from a Chartering Organization, from a stakeholder group not represented in the CCWG, or may be self-appointed and derive from within the ICANN or broader community. Participants will be able to actively participate in and attend all CCWG meetings, work groups and sub-work groups. However, should there be a need for a consensus call or decision, such consensus call or decision will be limited to CCWG members appointed by the Chartering Organizations who may consult as appropriate with their respective Chartering Organization.
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein E-mail: <mailto:Judith@jhellerstein.com>Judith@jhellerstein.com Website: <http://www.jhellerstein.com>www.jhellerstein.com Linked In: <http://www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/>www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 9/30/2016 11:39 AM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
Please note that we need any concerns raised with utmost haste.
Alan
At 27/09/2016 12:31 AM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
Somehow this got lost and never went to the ALAC. We will clearly not meet the deadline, but I have said we would reply as soon as possible.
A bit of background. As the draft Charter says, the work of the CCWG will not be to allocate funds, but to develop a process for doing this. A lot of work has gone into the draft charter, and I believe that it is close to ready. There are many constraints on what the funds can be used for based on the ICANN Bylaws, and given the amount of money (currently $235,000,000 if the .web auction stands) conflict of interest is a very serious matter.
Please get any comments to me by the end of Monday at the very latest.
Of crucial importance are matters of substance which would stop the ALAC from ratifying the charter. If you find typos and such, please let me know but that is not the focus.
Alan
Subject: For your review - proposed charter new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 16:41:28 +0000
Sending on behalf of Jonathan Robinson, new gTLD Auction Proceeds Drafting Team Chair & Alan Greenberg, DT Vice-Chair:
Dear SO/AC Chairs,
On behalf of the new gTLD Auction Proceeds Drafting Team (DT), we are delighted to submit to you and your respective SO/ACs, the proposed charter for a Cross-Community Working Group on new gTLD Auction Proceeds. As you may recall, representatives of all ICANN SO/ACs, apart from the ccNSO (which decided not to take part in the DT effort), participated in the DT deliberations (see <https://community.icann.org/x/AR_AAw>https://community.icann.org/x/AR_AAw for DT members).
This proposed charter is the result of extensive input and deliberations, including careful review of input that was received as part of the cross-community session at ICANN 56 in Helsinki (see <https://community.icann.org/x/fgmbAw%29>https://community.icann.org/x/fgmbAw) and we believe it now represents a careful balance between the different viewpoints and perspectives, including from both the DT Members and the ICANN Board liaisons to the DT. As such, the DT would like to request you review the proposed charter with this careful balance in mind and only flag to the DT any pertinent issues that would prevent your respective SO/AC from adopting this charter. We would like to request you highlight such pertinent issues by 30 September 2016 at the latest, including an indication of when you anticipate your respective SO/AC to be in a position to consider the charter for adoption following 30 September, provided that no pertinent issues have been identified by any of the ICANN SO/ACs.
Of course, should you have any clarifying questions, please do not hesitate to respond to this message. The DT looks forward to receiving your feedback.
Best wishes,
Jonathan Robinson, DT Chair & Alan Greenberg, DT Vice-Chair Content-Type: application/msword; name="CCWG Auction Proceeds - clean - FINAL Charter - 9 September 2016.doc"; x-mac-type=42494E41; x-mac-creator=4D535744 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="CCWG Auction Proceeds - clean - FINAL Charter - 9 September" 2016.doc" X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
1;DM5PR03MB2714;9:1gmqnEhp7gkCouELrLqnZyNOqReRcVRm6NYT5thEWR36TD1tnCgjJL/PlgcB0SdatHpmKhDmZUbEzBvB6AoEKNqG9VjIUmW9DThrIu0Ejx92/6ruy0N4kEDXc395WldzfI+EmEZ/j5DSERwf9MzBb6FpVQCUVJAwJoqLlFub9ytahPHLevWmvt5o86/ZV60BYHI0UPGqpLgrMu/0Cv25xQ==
Content-Type: application/pdf; name="CCWG Auction Proceeds - clean - FINAL Charter - 9 September 2016.pdf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="CCWG Auction Proceeds - clean - FINAL Charter - 9 September" 2016.pdf" X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
1;DM5PR03MB2714;9:1gmqnEhp7gkCouELrLqnZyNOqReRcVRm6NYT5thEWR36TD1tnCgjJL/PlgcB0SdatHpmKhDmZUbEzBvB6AoEKNqG9VjIUmW9DThrIu0Ejx92/6ruy0N4kEDXc395WldzfI+EmEZ/j5DSERwf9MzBb6FpVQCUVJAwJoqLlFub9ytahPHLevWmvt5o86/ZV60BYHI0UPGqpLgrMu/0Cv25xQ==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
1;DM5PR03MB2714;9:1gmqnEhp7gkCouELrLqnZyNOqReRcVRm6NYT5thEWR36TD1tnCgjJL/PlgcB0SdatHpmKhDmZUbEzBvB6AoEKNqG9VjIUmW9DThrIu0Ejx92/6ruy0N4kEDXc395WldzfI+EmEZ/j5DSERwf9MzBb6FpVQCUVJAwJoqLlFub9ytahPHLevWmvt5o86/ZV60BYHI0UPGqpLgrMu/0Cv25xQ==
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list <mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA... )
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list <mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
1;DM5PR03MB2714;9:TvLIFA685ZIGaQKayB9uLbTkWe/ca69vVGtj4l9Sog8L9yd3NYlK71340ZFZjs58EFp89eGi4H3nG1y7ZR73IRP2XNe4q3Q5GmjyVcqAzj2tjRkmqQFGa4cREO/Oex1WqQiCGxaYjlK6B90vdV3GR62zga8f/2Ft1Zgwjy/DcpGGnOIlZKa9115JDYKx/qJRIw3JYzPxIXDMVdcbFJ/ju7t88JOsDFv/7AzCHzzEuqk=
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
participants (2)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Judith Hellerstein