Dear all, Please find the attendance of the call attached to this email and the MP3 recording below for the CCWG Auction Proceeds call held on Thursday, 25 May 2017 at 14:00 UTC. Mp3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-auction-proceeds-25may17-en.mp3 AC Recording: https://participate.icann.org/p78jaobmeye/<https://participate.icann.org/p78jaobmeye/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=4020b23172121acd7b0f66f76a51ad1d0d7d98e9a0c0fd4d5acdc0813f5651bd> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar-23nov&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=8_WhWIPqsLT6TmF1Zmyci866vcPSFO4VShFqESGe_5iHWGlBLwwwehFBfjrsjWv9&m=uidTA5V7RlRhqXBxGhLbVHOzk2lvDzLHK99nhjsKzW0&s=G7owpjQHHbzd9bFlrfdYX7Lik6lU9W8BeG1n7HUqLpI&e=> ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/ Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/YAvfAw Thank you. Kind regards, Julie Bisland ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Thursday, 25 May 2017 Julie Bisland:Welcome to the CCWG New gTLD Auction Proceeds call on Thursday 25 May 2017 at 14:00 UTC for 90 minutes. Mary Uduma: Thanks Julie. was just trying my connectivity, here. will be back in 30 mins hadia Elminiawi:Good afternoon from Cairo Julie Bisland:Hello Hadia hadia Elminiawi:Hi Julie Julf Helsingius:Good afternoon Olga Cavalli - GAC Argentina 2:Hello all from Buenos Aires Julie Bisland:Hello Julf and Olga. Welcome all! Olga Cavalli - GAC Argentina:thanks! today is our national independence day! Julf Helsingius:And Amsterdam is recovering form ManU-Ajax football finals last night Manal Ismail:Hello everyone :) !! Ching Chiao:Hi all Vanda Scartezini:hi everyone! Ching Chiao:dialing in elliot noss:good day Julf Helsingius:Oh, and Happy Towel Day! Erika Mann:I'm here . Will change location. Internet is bad today. Erika Mann:I'm here Erika Mann:We have Trump Vanda Scartezini:kkkkk Julf Helsingius:Erika: Loud and clear Maureen Hilyard:Very clear Erika Ching Chiao:Erika we can hear you very well Zain Khan:Hello amigos! Im here now :) Sebastien (ALAC):ALl is good Erika Erika Mann:Thank you all! Asha Hemrajani:Good evening from Singapore, sorry I am a bit late Ching Chiao:Good evening Asha. Good to have you :) elliot noss:I liked manal's changes, particularly wrt our need for clarity on the mission (objective of fund) elliot noss:hi asha Asha Hemrajani:你好 Ching Asha Hemrajani:Hi Elliot Manal Ismail:I'm sorry Marika no I didn't see yit .. Stephanie Perrin:My apologies for being late. Vanda Scartezini:makes sense Erika Erika Mann:Have I lost you? Manal Ismail:I hope my point is clear and am sure Marika will do a great job :) .. don't want to waste time in word smithing .. happy to take it over email .. Vanda Scartezini:looks clear for me Maureen Hilyard:The additional text will help to clarify our process Ahmed Bakht:+1 to Manal hadia Elminiawi:+1 Erika , postpone the answer to the question Vanda Scartezini:+ 1 erika, it is too open now for find a commum solution Ahmed Bakht:+1 hadia Elminiawi:to early to answer the question now Stephanie Perrin:Agree to defer Nadira AL-Araj:It would be better to have a wider perpsective on the different models available Maureen Hilyard:+1 Erika until we get further clarity Stephanie Perrin:We can certainly generate a parking lot of questions as they come up Julf Helsingius:agree hadia Elminiawi:+1 stephanie Vanda Scartezini:+1 Staphanie - parking lot is a good idea and make it easy to find Marika Konings:This is from the response to the Board: Concerning the suggested nominal goal for the overhead is no more than 5% by theICANN Board, the CCWG will definitely consider this input when it considers the relevantcharter questions as well as the elements the Board has suggested the proposedmechanism and/or process should include. Several CCWG members/participants didpoint out, however, that the overhead costs will depend on the actual mechanismrecommended as a result of the CCWG deliberations and may therefore vary from the5% recommended by the ICANN Board. Nadira AL-Araj:A these points are good to prepare a framework to how to deal with the beneficiaries Ahmed Bakht:Comments from both sides are strong, however, my vote is for giving preference to developing economies because they already have certain constraints John Levine:It's OK to make it a consideration, very bad idea to reserve a fixed percentage Ching Chiao:agree with Alan hadia Elminiawi:+1 Alan to not restrict the use of the funds to any innovative possibilities Manal Ismail:Agree to keeping all doors open at this very early stage Vanda Scartezini:agree with Alan + also underserved groups inside developed regions Mary Uduma:+1@Alan and Manal Manal Ismail:+1 Elliot Ahmed Bakht:Seems some sound issue Asha Hemrajani:I would like to understand what everyone thinks about "giving priority/preference" to any one particular sector Nadira AL-Araj:One of the scenarios might come as recommendation from this group is to give the framework to an independent financial well established organization to deal with this fund according to the recommendations. So it is better to keep everything is open as both Alen and Erika has mentioned. elliot noss:remember I am only limiting the comments to i) beneficiaries >> organizations and ii) those in need elliot noss:I see nothing limiting there Becky Burr:maybe we should think about this in a different way. The use of the funds has to be within ICANN's Mission, in addition, our Core Commitments require ICANN Seeking and supporting broad, informed participation reflecting thefunctional, geographic, and cultural diversity of the Internet at all levelsof policy development and decision-making to ensure that the bottomup,multistakeholder policy development process is used to ascertainthe global public interest and that those processes are accountableand transparent; Stephanie Perrin:I think that when we get down to the nitty gritty of evaluating the proposals, points would be given for local projects, in underdeveloped regions (covers all options there) and projects executed by locals. Stephanie Perrin:However I agree with Elliot that we need to bake that notion into the purpose Asha Hemrajani:So Elliott & Alan as a follow on from your comments, would you not support "giving priority or preference to any one particular group. Is my understanding correct? elliot noss:@asha I would give preference to those in need. this is NOT limiting. it is descriptive elliot noss:does anyone think differently? Ching Chiao:yup i agree with the need-based approach elliot noss:I am comfortable not leaving this open to someone doing cool research in the DNS in silicon valley which could be not for profit (as an example) Asha Hemrajani:@Elliott ok now I see what you mean. "those in need" is very broad and giving preference to "those in need" does not restrict. Asha Hemrajani:Thanks Alan, that is exactly what I wanted to clarify (from your perspective). Nadira AL-Araj:+1 Alan, those what we have to focus on the time being to define the general purpose of this fund Asha Hemrajani:Thanks Alan, you got my question. Maureen Hilyard:I agree Erika to delay this decision I thnk that it is important that clear criteria and guidelines are required but these have yet to be established Erika Mann:Hadia! hadia Elminiawi:i am talking Becky Burr:most effectively and consistent with ICANN's Mission, Commitments, and Core Values, including seeking and supporting broad, informed participation reflecting thefunctional, geographic, and cultural diversity of the Internet Vanda Scartezini:totally agree with Alan... good projects shall have opportunity - so no limitation by now hadia Elminiawi:ok Manal Ismail:can't hear u hadia .. Marika Konings:@Hadia - your mic doesn't appear active. hadia Elminiawi:Ok ill type my chat Erika Mann:We can't hear you!!! Marika Konings:Make sure it is connected (click on the phone symbol at the top). Alternatively we can also dial-out to you. elliot noss:no elliot noss:you misdescribed what I said erica hadia Elminiawi:apparently I have a problem with my mic Stephanie Perrin:+1 must be for those in need, not simply cool ideas Julf Helsingius:"need" is just tricky to define Julie Bisland:Hadia, i've sent you a private chat if you'd like the operator to dial out to you. Nadira AL-Araj:@Elliot, Sometime, those in need might not lead to development Becky Burr:I agree that we shouldn't fund projects that the applicant already has the means to accomplish, but I don't exactly know what "in need" means in all contexts elliot noss:@nadira agree. as I know you know better than me, development is hard Nadira AL-Araj:@Ellliot then it is better to put a framework that lead to some developments to those in need. elliot noss:that was NOT what I said elliot noss:@nadira I love that idea. I look forward to hearing specifics there Stephanie Perrin:I agree that in "need" can be tricky, and we do not want to preclude the development of tools somewhere, to help those in "need". This is why baking th concept of underserved (need to find better words) is important. This is not a research fund, in other words, for economies where research funds are available. Manal Ismail:I think it should go to cool/creative/innovative ideas (whatever we want to call them) which need the funding irrespective of where they come from .. Vanda Scartezini:good point ALAN, new development , innovation may also be considered hadia Elminiawi:And what if you have two beneficiaries in need one from an underepresnted community and one from a well represented community and you can allocate the money to only one, Which one of the beneficiaries will you choose? Jonathan Robinson:What about something core to SSR such as Root Servers? Would that qualify? Strikes me that we need to keep an opening for core SSR issues in either an R&D or operational context Nadira AL-Araj:as you've worte @elliot is not easy, but make sure to make the recievers have sustianble programs in thier proposals. elliot noss:again, I did not say anything about undeveloped regions Stephanie Perrin:I think we can see that this is going to be a highly controversial topic, whenever we get to it. Julf Helsingius:stephanie +1 Asha Hemrajani:@elliot yes I know you didn't say undeveloped regions, I was referring to the text on the top line of this page Asha Hemrajani:"Should any priority or preference be given to organizations from developing economies, projects implemented in such regions and/or under-represented groups?" hadia Elminiawi:+1 core infrastructure projects Vanda Scartezini:guess we all agree the answer to this question is NO - Julf Helsingius:"parts of ICANN" is equally controversial Nadira AL-Araj:+1 Stephanie and that is why it is important to give it priority to discuss this issue Julf Helsingius:The more creative something is, the more likely it is to fail elliot noss:parts of ICANN is MUCH more controversial Asha Hemrajani:@elliot, we could consider adding something along the lines of "not funding projects that would normally be funded out of the ICANN budget" Asha Hemrajani:+1 Alan regarding operational funding Ching Chiao:If looking at the new gTLD process itself , we were talking about giving priority to certain "categories" of applicants. Eventually the prioirty (of delegation) was given to IDN applicants. Not necessarily related to the question here but a decision made before Alan Greenberg:I do support using some of the funds to build up the ICANN reserve (which implicitly frees up operational funding) but if we figure out how to di this (as suggested by the Board), it will be threough a different mechanism. elliot noss:if it is a problem, I am ok not to elliot noss:I don't want to push more Marika Konings:We would first need to make clear what the proposals are? John Levine:There are way too many worms in the can that reserve funding would open hadia Elminiawi:+1 Marika Ching Chiao:Erika -- could you repeat it again ? Jonathan Robinson:I am not 100% clear what the question is? Manal Ismail:same here .. Alan Greenberg:Not sure what question is in this case. Stephanie Perrin:Let's take the time to do a survey monkey, this is a threshold question in my view elliot noss:sure Stephanie Perrin:Exactly, it is good to understand the range of viewpoints as we go forward Asha Hemrajani:agree with Alan's point elliot noss:agree. we should call it program expenses Vanda Scartezini:yes there is two different question here Erika Mann:It's Xavier who is speaking hadia Elminiawi:I can't hear you anymore Erika Mann:You can't hear me? Ching Chiao:Erika we can hear you Erika Mann:Xavier? Nadira AL-Araj:Will be waiting for the clarification of what "overhead" in this question means. Thanks Marika Konings:See https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_D... Marika Konings:and more specifically https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_documen... hadia Elminiawi:Thanks Marika Julie Bisland:Then next CCWG New gTLD Auction Proceeds call will be held on Thursday, 08 June 2017 at 14:00 UTC for 90 minutes. Julf Helsingius:Thank you all! elliot noss:bye all thanks Tripti Sinha (RSSAC) 2:Thank you Nadira AL-Araj:Thanks Marika, Erika and all hadia Elminiawi:thank you all bye Ching Chiao:Thank you all Manal Ismail:Thanks everyone .. Bye .. Maureen Hilyard:Thank you Erika and Marika Erika Mann:Bye, bye! Vanda Scartezini:great time to all Asha Hemrajani:Bye and thanks all. Zain Khan:Thank you! Ciao ciao