I think that’s a valid point but it’s also skewed by the fiduciary responsibilities of the board to ICANN in this scenario that will always have precedence in this case when we have the scenario of the depletion of the reserve fund while there is another ICANN controller fund available. The community still has avenues available to challenge the decision of its feels warranted (I personally would not support that). Sent from my iPhone On 24 Oct 2018, at 14:30, Robert Guerra <rguerra@privaterra.org<mailto:rguerra@privaterra.org>> wrote: Erika, Thanks for informing us of the meet you had with the icann chair and details of the board resolution . as a newcomer to this CCWG, a long time participant at ICANN and a background in working with donors to support and promote internet related projects related to security and policy development I see this action as an important precedent. It sends a signal that if it that if we can’t get things moving quicker - in a timely fashion that is consistent with ICANN’s mission, in a way that follows legal frameworks for US entities, and addressing real needs , then the funding might be spent for us. That’s a real concern that should not be underestimated While I recognize a lot of important work and discussions have been undertaken by this ccwg, we have also taken a period of time that is far too long given the great needs that exist to maintain a stable, secure and interoperable internet I look forward to meeting some of you in Barcelona, hopefully at the gala tonight as well working with you virtually in the coming weeks. Regards Robert _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds