It's likely I won't be able to join the next call, so if possible I would like to receive links to recordings and transcripts. I'll contribute some issues I recall in the 2012 round: 1. Lack of clear guidance to objection and CPE panelists led to inconsistent determinations 2. Lack of fee negotiations between ICANN and ICC led to unpredictable and very high fees to community and limited public interest objections 3. Lack of objection consolidation rules led to inconsistent determinations 4. Asking applicants to post letters of credit instead of additional amount to application fee led to troublesome and time-spending banking issues 5. AGB changes during process, including but not limited to vertical integration rules and RAA 2013 requirement, led to invalidation of proposed business plans 6. Lack of adherence to timelines and deadlines led to unpredictability 7. Lack of registry service provider figure led to additional costs to applicants and ICANN for evaluation 8. Lack of standing to registrants and independent objector regarding string confusion objections led to registries proposing possibly confusing strings 9. Excessive gaming protection and late rule definitions on joint applicant support led to possibly zero supported registries 10. Lack of queuing criteria led to delay 11. Lack of name collisions informing to community led to launch delays (that could be avoided by informing CAs and activating controlled interruption at Reveal Day) 12. Lack of rules to resolve indirect contention sets is still leading to delay 13. Lack of objectivity in AGB that have both historical information, rationales, process rules and instruments. AGB should be shorter reflecting only rules and procedures, referring to other documents to provide reasonings. 14. Lack of clear guidance to string similarity evaluation panels led to delays, to inconsistent determinations and to false negatives 15. Lack of model letter of credit led to multiple rounds of clarifying questions 16. Lack of detailed technical and financial questions led to multiple rounds of clarifying questions 17. Lack of clarifying questions procedures led to on-the-fly rules creation 18. Lack of change process procedures led to on-the-fly rules creation 19. Lack of guidance regarding change process relation to objections and CPE led to inconsistent determinations 20. Lack of redress mechanisms led to on-the-fly adapting of already inadequate accountability mechanisms 21. Lack of signed application agreements led to issues in jurisdictions requiring such agreements in order to do international money transfers 22. Lack of signed auction agreements at application time led to delays to start auctioning of contention sets 23. Lack of non-interactive option to submit application led to creation of complex, cumbersome and fail-prone application submission system 24. Imposing of models that only make sense to generic TLDs preventing innovation in applications of the DNS system I guess the progress of the group might remind of some other issues we faced along the process... Rubens