All,
Just to follow on from my comments yesterday, it is my personal belief (and not necessarily the view of the IPC, but not necessarily not the view either) that this Charter should be open to a real and robust public comment – not just to those with the time and resources to have traveled to Helsinki. There is no rush to disburse these funds (correct?), so sending the message to the public that ICANN doesn’t want their opinion on the correct process to spend these windfalls, I believe, is an avoidable mistake.
Regards,
Paul
Paul D. McGrady, Jr.
policy@paulmcgrady.com
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of James M. Bladel
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 3:37 PM
To: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org>
Subject: [council] FW: For your review - proposed charter new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG
Councilors -
See message below, sent on behalf of the gTLD Auction Proceeds Charter Drafting Team. Their Draft Charter for a proposed CCWG is attached, and they are requesting feedback by 30 September. If time allows, lets plan to add this as a discussion point for our next call (29 SEP).
Thank you,
J.
From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 12:41
Subject: For your review - proposed charter new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG
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 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) 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