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, 27 April 2017 at 14:00 UTC. Mp3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-auction-proceeds-27apr17-en.mp3 AC Recording: https://participate.icann.org/p5274mpyls7/ 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/atLRAw Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle DeSmyter ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Thursday, 27 April 2017 Michelle DeSmyter: Dear All, Welcome to the New gTLD Auction Proceeds Cross Community Working Group call on Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 14:00 UTC. Michelle DeSmyter:Agenda meeting page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_a... Erika Mann:Hi team! Can we test audio quickly? Alan Greenberg:We can play the new game of chance in ICANN. Will we have Adobe Connect sound on this meeting? Alan Greenberg:Yes,. AC audio is fine here. Alan Greenberg:At least outgoing. Alan Greenberg:We have been having a lot of problems in recent days. Alan Greenberg:Not on bridge yet. Erika Mann:I can hear you well Alan! Erika Mann:Let's check if you can hear me! Erika Mann:Hi Ching! Ching Chiao:Hi Erika how are you ? Olga Cavalli - GAC Argentina:Hello all Asha Hemrajani:Good evening from Singapore Olga Cavalli - GAC Argentina:Good morning from Argentina :) Erika Mann:Hello All! Joke Braeken:Hi Ching and Erika, the ccnso council will have to decide to launch a call for volunteers Ching Chiao:Hi Asha, Olga -- good to have you Nadira ALARAJ:Hello All Ching Chiao:Hi Joke -- I was just chatting this with Erika. Thanks for bringing this up! Joke Braeken:welcome, thanks for raising it Ching Asha Hemrajani:你好 Ching! Asha Hemrajani:Joke, that is good to hear Vanda Scartezini:hi all Ching Chiao:您好 Asha 女士 :) Hadia Elminiawi:hello all Nadira ALARAJ:can we the view the document in the final form. Hadia Elminiawi:+1 to the text proposed Marika Konings:The proposed modification would be: Several CCWG members/participants did point out, however, that an the overhead costs will depend on the actual mechanism recommended and may therefore vary from the 5% recommended by the ICANN Board. Jon Nevett:That's better than opining what is standard elliot noss:I am strongly in favour of 1% Nadira ALARAJ:Thanks Marika, it sound felixible. elliot noss:$1.4m is TONS at an expense level to give away money elliot noss:but I am ok with the language Jon Nevett:right -- might vary higher or lower -- we shouldn't mention 10% as standard Erika Mann:Thank you Elliot! Vanda Scartezini:i believe to use the wording of Marika but suggest 10% as ALan is suggesting - we leave open enough but state a low limit Jon Nevett:marika's language captures the flexibility very well. Marika Konings:The language seems to accomodate those that may prefer a higher or a lower number by recognising that it is something that will need further consideration but can only informed by further details on the mechanism that is preferred. Marika Konings:seems = aims Erika Mann:I think so too Jon! Nadira ALARAJ:@Marika, the ideas of putting an exact figure is challenging without having any expecation or prediction of what type of project it will be funded and for how long as it was mentioned here Alan Greenberg:I was NOT proposing 20%. I mentioned it to make sure the Board did NOT think we were in that ballpark. Stephanie Perrin:Agree with Elliot, but suggested language does seem to work and register range of views. Manal Ismail:I'm fine with Marika's language too .. Hadia Elminiawi:I meant +1 to the proposed modification Maureen Hilyard:@Stephanie +1 Jon Nevett:Fund is $233M right now and there still are strings to be resolved Jon Nevett:5% is over $11M elliot noss:ok. my 1% is now = $2.33m! Erika Mann:No, we can't work with amount above the 100 Mio Erika Mann:... at least not for right now ... Jon Nevett:just saying what the current fund is Erika Mann:Ching!!! Erika Mann:Ching where are you??? Asha Hemrajani:@Vanda I am not sure if 10% could be considered a "low" limit Marika Konings:You can also find the proposed language on the right hand side in the notes Marika Konings:@Manal - would adding 'as a result of the CCWG deliberations' address your comment? Marika Konings:see on the right hand side in brackets where it would fit Manal Ismail:I'm trying to see whether adding something along the following lines may be useful "At the end, this remains to be determined by the CCWG deliberations." Vanda Scartezini:Ashaa, you may be right, in principle I agree with 5% in the emails exchanged but I can understand ALAN points since ädminsitrative issues" can be largelly understandings - Marika is good bbut it is relevant to written p point is what will be read in the future Brad Verd (RSSAC):I keep hearing the sentiment of a goal to minimize the costs to disperse funds. Can we add something to the proposed language that conveys that sentiment and is audited annually to try to keep the expenses in check. Stephanie Perrin:I understand the need to keep this issue at a high level, but to me the operative point is what any administration funds are spent on...there is no fund raising, but there needs to be good review, metrics and other accountability mechanisms in place for funded projects. Vanda Scartezini:agree we shall not institucionalize any foundation but admistrative can be widely understood Vanda Scartezini:good idea Erika. Asha Hemrajani:Brad & Stephanie +1 Alan Greenberg:COnstraining the project and not institutionalizing may be important considerations. But using the money WELL is at the top of the priority pile in my mind. Nadira ALARAJ:This time sound better, thank you Marika Jon Nevett:looks good Dietmar Stefitz:I do not agree in a compelte distribution and would opt for a Foundation which will remain Vanda Scartezini: agree with Asha Alan Greenberg:We are spending FAR too much time on this. Peter Vergote (ccNSO):yes Maureen Hilyard:yes Vanda Scartezini:yes Nadira ALARAJ:+1 for a week Manal Ismail:yes.. Nadira ALARAJ:no Dietmar Stefitz:yes Stephanie Perrin:The fact that we are spending time on it demonstrates what a hot button issue it is and if we remember this it will help us keep focus on economical but efficient options. Asha Hemrajani:well put Stephanie Tripti Sinha (RSSAC):I believe we need to look into the creation of a foundation where principal funds are not spent and, instead, invested. The growth is then distributed. This is a unique opportunity for this community and it should maximized for posterity and for the good of the Internet. Julf Helsingius:Apologies for joining this late, my flight was delayed Ching Chiao:I think the fundamental answer to Q5 is Xavier / Sam's note on CoI Ching Chiao:I think that's a great base document and guideline Erika Mann:Tripti - yes, that's an idea as well. We will have to start talking about various models Tripti Sinha (RSSAC):Thank you Erika. Erika Mann:Welcome Julf! We will try to finish at 5 PM, to allow members /participants to join another call Vanda Scartezini:@Tripti - we may be out of institucionalize a foundation, the cost of such sttructure in US is too high Julf Helsingius:Thanks, Erika! Erika Mann:Tripti, All - feel free to send'fund' ideas/expert names etc to staff!/ Marika Konings:With regards to the current list of experts identified, please see https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_documen... and feel free to add! elliot noss:again, I was talking about it as a POSSIBILITY, not a determined outcome Vanda Scartezini:agree with ALAN Stephanie Perrin:Agree with Elliot. Would add that if we construct the frame properly, and develop very strong criteria for COI, then the review of the proposals is quite do-able. As to Alan's concern about consistency, I am not convinced that outsourcing necessarily gives consistency either. Marika Konings:Correct Erika - this is input provided by individual WG members / participants Asha Hemrajani:Understood Erika...just wanted to make it clear that the Board has no preference at this point. Tripti Sinha (RSSAC):I need to drop off now. Agree with Erika's proposed next steps. Stephanie Perrin:The range of project size and goals is a very important factor in determining administration models in my view. Nadira ALARAJ:@Marika, regarding the list of experts, it doesn't include the identified by the survey that was criuclated to the CCWG members. Ching Chiao:Based on legal and fidiciary constraint, ICANN can not avoid the responsibility of overseeing the proposals. Can ICANN outsource this function to a outside entity? Marika Konings:correct, these are external experts. I'll make sure to get those survey results posted and linked in this document so it is all in one place. Nadira ALARAJ:Thanks Marika for you efforts in keeping up with all of our demands ;) Marika Konings:My pleasure :-) Vanda Scartezini:great job Marika, indeed Alan Greenberg:@Ching, we can outsource what we want. But have to take responsibility for the quality of the resultant work. Alan Greenberg:We are past the hour. Vanda Scartezini:other call already started Asha Hemrajani:Will have to sign off now. Thank you all. Vanda Scartezini:thanks Jon Nevett:Thanks! Hadia Elminiawi:Thank you all Nadira ALARAJ:Thank you akk elliot noss:thanks everyone. bye Dietmar Stefitz:Thnaks to all of you! Manal Ismail:Thanks .. Bye .. Hadia Elminiawi:bye Joke Braeken:Thank you, bye Erika Mann:Thank you All! Peter Vergote (ccNSO):Bye all Maureen Hilyard:Thank you Erika, Marika and the team Erika Mann:Thank you Maureen!