Dear Working Group members, Some additional comment for tomorrows call regarding section 1.9 that was just released tonight. I am extremely disappointed to be missing this particular call given that Community Applications are on the agenda. f. Deliberations 1. Second bullet point - I believe this is intended to say "only after the 2012 application window closed;" 2. Although mentioned in other sections, it is worth repeating concerns discussed in the WT about the lack of redress or appeal on substantive matters including: errors of fact, misinterpretations, visibility or challenge to research cited and relied upon by CPE providers, content expertise, etc. 3. Concern about contractual agreements ICANN knowingly made with CPE providers that prevented transparency of CPE documents and other related materials (as evidenced by recent threats by EIU to sue ICANN if information was released) 4. How successful Reconsideration Requests about CPE are addressed when there is only one CPE Provider to be sent back to for what ICANN has called a "new" CPE. This raises concerns about applicants ability to receive a fair and unbiased CPE from a CPE Provider that was shown to have mishandled their application on first attempt. The original plan by ICANN was to contract with two CPE Providers, which would have at minimum offered the applicant an alternative to their prior mishandling. I will absolutely review the recording following the meeting and offer anything further at that time. Much thanks Jamie Jamie Baxter dotgay LLC <mailto:jamie@dotgay.com> jamie@dotgay.com <http://www.dotgay.com/> www.dotgay.com A Certified LGBT Business Enterprise (LGBTBE) Please join us on Facebook at <http://www.facebook.dotgay.com/> www.facebook.dotgay.com and follow us at <http://www.twitter.com/dotgay> www.twitter.com/dotgay --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus