I hope it does not mean - special prices for unwanted customers, but it might be read so. (personally, I do not understand what proactive pricing fees mean in real life other than what I wrote). Sincerely Yours, Maxim Alzoba Special projects manager, International Relations Department, FAITID Current UTC offset: +3.00 (.Moscow)

On 1 Oct 2020, at 15:57, Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote:

Hi All,

Could anybody translate this one for me: The PDP WG notes that “the purpose of an application fee floor is to deter speculation and potential warehousing of TLDs, as well as mitigate against the use of TLDs for abusive or malicious purposes.” ICANN org seeks input on whether this provision could be harmonized with the "bona fide" applicant provision from the Auction section, as the fee schedule could be proactive as opposed to a reactive means of deterring speculative applications   <> Does this say we should put a focus on a sufficiently high application fee floor – or does it mean that the fee floor is irrelevant as other means would deter speculative applications?

Thanks,

Alexander

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Karen Lentz Sent: Donnerstag, 1. Oktober 2020 03:21 To: gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] FW: ICANN Org SubPro comments

Dear all,

Forwarding for your information the input from ICANN org to the draft Final Report. We have also submitted this for addition into the comment tool being used for this comment forum.

Best regards, Karen

From: Theresa Swinehart <theresa.swinehart@icann.org <mailto:theresa.swinehart@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 at 5:10 PM To: "jeff@jjnsolutions.com <mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com>" <jeff@jjnsolutions.com <mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com>>, "langdonorr@gmail.com <mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>" <langdonorr@gmail.com <mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>> Cc: Goran Marby <goran.marby@icann.org <mailto:goran.marby@icann.org>>, Karen Lentz <karen.lentz@icann.org <mailto:karen.lentz@icann.org>>, David Olive <david.olive@icann.org <mailto:david.olive@icann.org>>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>> Subject: ICANN Org SubPro comments

Dear Cheryl and Jeff,

Please find the attached letter and submission from ICANN org regarding the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group Draft final report.

I hope you and your families are well.

Kind regards,

Theresa

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

Hi, Jeff, read your comment only now. Understood. Thanks, Alexander From: Jeff Neuman [mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com] Sent: Donnerstag, 1. Oktober 2020 16:40 To: Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba@gmail.com>; Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] FW: ICANN Org SubPro comments All, I appreciate the fact that you are reading some of the comments that have come in and encourage all of you to do so. That said, I ask that you hold off a little bit before posting questions or comments on those comments until such time that we have all had an opportunity to read and digest the comments, understand their context and schedule the applicable discussions. I cant and don’t want to stop any good discussions, but giving some time for ICANN Org to produce its report and for us to review will help us make sure that we are able to capture all of these discussions as we finalize the Final Report. Thanks. Sincerely, Jeff Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 E: <mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> jeff@jjnsolutions.com http://jjnsolutions.com From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org> > On Behalf Of Maxim Alzoba Sent: Thursday, October 1, 2020 9:34 AM To: Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> > Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] FW: ICANN Org SubPro comments I hope it does not mean - special prices for unwanted customers, but it might be read so. (personally, I do not understand what proactive pricing fees mean in real life other than what I wrote). Sincerely Yours, Maxim Alzoba Special projects manager, International Relations Department, FAITID Current UTC offset: +3.00 (.Moscow) On 1 Oct 2020, at 15:57, Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin> > wrote: Hi All, Could anybody translate this one for me: The PDP WG notes that “the purpose of an application fee floor is to deter speculation and potential warehousing of TLDs, as well as mitigate against the use of TLDs for abusive or malicious purposes.” ICANN org seeks input on whether this provision could be harmonized with the "bona fide" applicant provision from the Auction section, as the fee schedule could be proactive as opposed to a reactive means of deterring speculative applications Does this say we should put a focus on a sufficiently high application fee floor – or does it mean that the fee floor is irrelevant as other means would deter speculative applications? Thanks, Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg [ <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org> mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Karen Lentz Sent: Donnerstag, 1. Oktober 2020 03:21 To: <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] FW: ICANN Org SubPro comments Dear all, Forwarding for your information the input from ICANN org to the draft Final Report. We have also submitted this for addition into the comment tool being used for this comment forum. Best regards, Karen From: Theresa Swinehart < <mailto:theresa.swinehart@icann.org> theresa.swinehart@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 at 5:10 PM To: " <mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> jeff@jjnsolutions.com" < <mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> jeff@jjnsolutions.com>, " <mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com> langdonorr@gmail.com" < <mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com> langdonorr@gmail.com> Cc: Goran Marby < <mailto:goran.marby@icann.org> goran.marby@icann.org>, Karen Lentz < <mailto:karen.lentz@icann.org> karen.lentz@icann.org>, David Olive < <mailto:david.olive@icann.org> david.olive@icann.org>, Steve Chan < <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> steve.chan@icann.org> Subject: ICANN Org SubPro comments Dear Cheryl and Jeff, Please find the attached letter and submission from ICANN org regarding the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group Draft final report. I hope you and your families are well. Kind regards, Theresa _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ( <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy> https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service ( <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos> https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

Jeff could you clarify Is ICANN pulling together a digest of comments for people to read that is less migraine inducing than that google spreadsheet? That was impossible to decipher. On Oct 1, 2020, at 9:55 AM, Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote:  Hi, ICANN Org states: ICANN org seeks clarity on whether the PDP WG intends for the maintenance of the 2012 AGB provisions contained in section 2.2.1.4.2. as a policy or if this is intended to be a Recommendation to maintain the implementation effort that was done through the AGB. If the later, can the PDP WG provide additional guidance on some issues that arose during the 2012 round, such as understanding the definition of "relevant governments or public authorities" (at city, state, country and continent level) and the impact that geopolitical changes within a region might have on what qualifies as the "relevant governments or public authorities" during the application processing period? Will the applicant be required to provide new documents of support or non-objection from new "relevant governments or public authorities"? My gut feeling is that most geo names will be city names. I called several times for a support letter tailor-made for city governments. When should that happen? Is that Staff (implementation) action or WG action? If I provide the current letter to a U.S. mayor: their eyes will bulge. The current draft letter is absolutely not suitable for city strings. Thanks, Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Karen Lentz Sent: Donnerstag, 1. Oktober 2020 03:21 To: gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] FW: ICANN Org SubPro comments Dear all, Forwarding for your information the input from ICANN org to the draft Final Report. We have also submitted this for addition into the comment tool being used for this comment forum. Best regards, Karen From: Theresa Swinehart <theresa.swinehart@icann.org<mailto:theresa.swinehart@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 at 5:10 PM To: "jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com>" <jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com>>, "langdonorr@gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>" <langdonorr@gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>> Cc: Goran Marby <goran.marby@icann.org<mailto:goran.marby@icann.org>>, Karen Lentz <karen.lentz@icann.org<mailto:karen.lentz@icann.org>>, David Olive <david.olive@icann.org<mailto:david.olive@icann.org>>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>> Subject: ICANN Org SubPro comments Dear Cheryl and Jeff, Please find the attached letter and submission from ICANN org regarding the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group Draft final report. I hope you and your families are well. Kind regards, Theresa _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.