Apropos Public Comments

[Mary.Wong at LAW.UNH.EDU]

Hello and sorry if I missed any subsequent discussion/decision on this. Given that the deadline for public comment is today, and I am still catching up on mailing list postings, replies and such, I sent in a brief personal comment generally supporting the At Large New gTLD WG's statement that Avri refers to below.

As it can take a bit of time before comments appear on the ICANN website, here is the comment I just submitted. I believe it is largely in line with much of our group's discussion and positions on the issue so far though it was of necessity submitted as a personal comment.

"The ICANN Board's commitment to ensuring accessibility to the new gTLD program by needy applicants, particularly those working in the public interest in developing countries, is both welcome and necessary. In addition, the work done to shape and create a workable, fair and specific program of financial assistance by the ICANN staff and community, in particular the JAS WG and the At Large New gTLD WG, is very much appreciated. 

The current proposals reflect the thoughtfulness and tremendous effort that have gone into this very worthy program. Nonetheless, several concerns remain, in particular those raised by the At Large New gTLD WG in its comments concerning the use of the US$2m and the need for better, more comprehensive and directed outreach. 

On the US$2m, it is possible - particularly given that the number of deserving applicants are unknown - that there may be more such deserving applicants and/or many with severe financial needs than even the fairest and most scrupulous attempt at equitable distribution might not be sufficient to provide truly meaningful assistance. In this regard the JAS and At Large New gTLD WG's suggestions as to seed funding should be further considered.

In addition, the At Large New gTLD WG's recommendation of a possible refund procedure is worth considering. Additionally, given the possibility of being disqualified from the new gTLD program altogether, certain applicants who do not meet a less critical item in the list of the threshold criteria could be given an opportunity by rhe SARP to "show cause" why they ought not to be disqualified.

On outreach, there is a real need to develop contact points, better ground level communcations and a deeper knowledge and understanding of the diversity of needs and cultures, and the means of reaching different communities, in the vast and diverse number of countries and non-homogenous cultures loosely grouped into a generic category termed the "developing world". Time is of the essence in this case, although this is a persistent issue in overall ICANN outreach - members of the ICANN community with deep ties in and members from develooing countries, such as those from At Large, the Non Commercial Stakeholder Group and the JAS WG, can be of great assistance to ICANN.

The Board's actions and the Financial Assistance criteria, process and overall program - are significant steps in the right direction after 2 years of difficult challenges and hard work. The new gTLD website, including the online Applicant Support Directory, are also good initiatives that I hope will be very helpful, particularly to new entrants to the ICANN community. 

Note: I offer these comments in my personal capacity, and not on behslf of my employer or any group I am otherwise associated with, including the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group or as one of its Council representatives, which I am currently."

Cheers
Mary

"Joy Liddicoat <joy at APC.ORG>" <joy at APC.ORG> wrote:


Thanks Avri - just back from holidays and picking this up today for APC who
will make a brief submission supporting the ALAC key points, noting one or
two additional points, and emphasising the importance of this for developing
countries.
Thanks again
Joy

-----Original Message-----
From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of Avri
Doria
Sent: Tuesday, 10 January 2012 4:31 a.m.
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: Re: Apropos Public Comments

Hi,

Thanks Bill.

The At-Large New gTLD Wg (ANgWG) is working on a comment.  It can be found
at:
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Comments+on+New+gTLD+Applicant+
Support+Program+-+Financial+Assistance>

It differs a bit from the ALAC comment because the ALAC comments was based
on a preliminary review and this is based on the ASP as submitted.  The
comment also takes into account the recent Applicant Support Program
briefing paper submitted to the Board:
<http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/board-briefing-materials-3-05jan12-en.pdf>

avri

On 9 Jan 2012, at 08:45, William Drake wrote:

> Rafik
> 
> As you and Avri were our point persons in the JAS and are also both in the
ALAC group, might it make sense for you to take a first cut at two
paragraphs that summarize your/our main concerns?  If we get something short
and sweet by tomorrow hopefully the PC could do a quick turn around on any
tweaks and approval/submission..I just got off a plane to a backlog I'm not
optimized for channeling your discussions and drafting at the moment, alas.
> 
> Bill
> 
> On Jan 8, 2012, at 7:42 PM, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> 
>> hello,
>> 
>> I do agree with Avri about encouraging more individual NCSG members to
send their comments, that will give definitely more weight. I agree about
endorsing ALAC statement and coordinating with ALAC on that matter.
>> 
>> Best Regards,
>>  
>> Rafik Dammak
>> @rafik
>> "fight for the users"
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 2012/1/7 Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I think a statement that endorses the ALAC statement, which I just
submitted to the comment area, would be a good thing.  And if there are any
other points that people want to make that we did not cover, that would be
good too.  There is a lot more in the program that we did not comment on
because we wanted to hit the major points.
>> 
>> Also any comment from individual NCSG members, especially those from
organizations in developing economies from their perspective would be
wonderful.  Getting a viable support program from ICANN is an uphill
struggle, so any help from the NC world would be helpful.
>> 
>> avri
>> 
>> 
>> On 6 Jan 2012, at 11:30, William Drake wrote:
>> 
>> > Hi Avri
>> >
>> > On Jan 6, 2012, at 9:48 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
>> >
>> >> Is there any intent amongst NCSG, NCUC or NPOC to comment on New gTLD
Applicant Support Program: Financial Assistance
<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/new-gtld-applicant-support-handbook-
20dec11-en.htm> which ends on 10 January 2012.
>> >
>> > Would be a good thing to do, since NC members spent a lot of juice
supporting this effort in Council, JAS, etc.  At the same time, your ALAC
group statement seems to cover the main points pretty well, so it's not
clear we need a crash push to restate them differently.  Perhaps a one para
reiteration of the highlights would suffice to add a little extra wind in
the sails?
>> >
>> > BD
>> 
>