Dear All, Please find the attendance and audio recording of the call attached to this email and the Adobe Connect recording (visual and audio) and AC Chat below for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 3 – String Contention, Objections & Disputes held on Tuesday, 23 May 2017 at 15:00 UTC. Adobe Connect recording: https://participate.icann.org/p7ewzrbz9pe/<https://participate.icann.org/p7ewzrbz9pe/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=4020b23172121acd7b0f66f76a51ad1d0d7d98e9a0c0fd4d5acdc0813f5651bd> The recordings of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt3 Agenda Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/IdTRAw Thank you. Kind regards, Julie ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for 23 May 2017 Julie Bisland:Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 3 – String Contention, Objections & Disputes will take place on Tuesday, 23 May 2017 at 15:00 UTC. Karen Day:Welcome Jamie - and thanks for your CC2 comments. Jamie Baxter | dotgay:Good morning .. my pleasure to offer comments from our experience as a community applicant. Annebeth Lange:Good afternoon from Norway avri doria:wow, a new intro to mtgs slide. Annebeth Lange:Karen, have you recieved my comments to CC2? I have sent them in, but I am a little unsure if I have done it the right way Karen Day:HI Annabeth, Yes, I saw yours as well this morning. Here's the link https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-subsequent-procedures-22mar17/2017-M... Annebeth Lange:Thanks Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):No questions. Steve Chan:FYI, the slides are unsynced at the moment. We are on slide 4 now. Steve Chan:We can of course sync them if you'd prefer. Jamie Baxter | dotgay:are these slides available somewhere? Steve Chan:@Jamie, we will send them along with the meeting notes/action items after the meeting Jamie Baxter | dotgay:great. thanks Steve Emily Barabas:You can also find them on the wiki here: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_I... Jamie Baxter | dotgay:Excellent. thanks Emily Annebeth Lange:Won't the ongoing discussion on categories on the list go into this as well? Robin Gross:If we do want to continue the preference given to "communities", we need to arrive at a shared definition of "community". Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):With apologies, I have to drop. I have a conflicting BRG meeting that's been in progress since the top of the hour. I'll read the transcript. avri doria:draftng team from the Work Track to work on defintion might be useful. avri doria:from a personal perspectiive (without chair hat) : i supported communities in the orignal policy of 2007 and still support the notion. Trang Nguyen:@Jamie, are you referring to implementation in the context of the criteria and evaluation methodology in the AGB, or in the context of execution (applying those criteria)? Annebeth Lange:+1, Avri Gg Levine (NABP):+1, Jamie Jim Prendergast:The character limits on responses alos impeded community applicants ability to explain their community approach. But thats probably implementation Trang Nguyen:Thank you for the clarification, Jamie! Annebeth Lange:+1, Jamie Robin Gross:I'm not convinced we should have communities Phil Buckingham:I personally think that there should be no priority given for any applicant for R2 -, but need also to eliminate contention sets - as money always wins at the end of the day . We must have a level playing field from the outset Robin Gross:be happy to. Annebeth Lange:I think there should be communities, but: Could post-delegation procedures stop gaming? If you claim to be a community and it turns out you are not after the delegation. Greg Shatan:Annebeth, I was thinking along the same lines. It might just inspire new gaming, but anything that keeps "community" from simply being gamed to get priority would be welcome. Jamie Baxter | dotgay:based on the inconsistencies and concerns of the current round, and as already advised by GAC, an appeals mechanism for CPE must be available. Gg Levine (NABP):It seems practical that the will of the many (community) would supercede the will of one (individual applicant). Robin Gross:I don't think there would be agreement on what kind of "community" should be given preferences. Gg Levine (NABP):Robin, do you mean if there is contention by two communities for the same string? Steve Chan:https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/pddrp Robin Gross:I mean as a general concept. The idea that some groups are more valued than others. I don't think this WG or the icann community generally can come to agreement on whom to privilege in this process. Julie Bisland:The next New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 3 – String Contention, Objections & Disputes will take place on Tuesday, 06 June 2017 at 20:00 UTC for 60 minutes. Greg Shatan:Bye all! Annebeth Lange:Bye all Robin Gross:thanks, Karen and all, bye! avri doria:bye