00:23:11 Jothan Frakes: Congratulations and good luck Jeff! I was just elected to the ExCom of the RrSG but not sure if that impacts my SOI for the group, @kathy can you email me to advise 00:23:24 Jothan Frakes: I am observer here vs member 00:24:08 Kathy Schnitt: @Jothan I will email you thank you. 00:29:46 Kathy Schnitt: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OYRqlx7W_RXg2ZbfQVMddzWzYmhVKNa2E7MRz6iwpCM/edit 00:34:53 Justine Chew: Yes, we should draw from the Study 1 Report which portions in Study 2 (and Study 3) are "problematic". 00:39:36 Anne Aikman-Scalese: If OCTO had a test system, that would comport with Sub Pro recommendations anticipated i the Final Report 00:40:20 Anne Aikman-Scalese: Jeff is best situatied 00:42:56 Justine Chew: I think NCAP DG should do what it thinks is best 00:45:53 Justine Chew: Since SubPro is currently proposing merely an Implementation Guidance, "The ICANN community should develop name collision risk criteria and a test to provide information to an applicant for any given string after the application window closes so that the applicant can determine if they should move forward with evaluation" 00:51:58 Justine Chew: @Anne, a mechanism does not necessarily means a test 00:54:24 Justine Chew: A mechanism can also be a table to criteria. 00:54:44 Justine Chew: Agree with Jim, we should just concentrate in what we are supposed to do. 00:55:09 Justine Chew: *concentrate on 00:55:56 Anne Aikman-Scalese: @Justine - it's actually a Recommendation. From Sub Pro Doc; Recommendation: Recommendation xx (Rationale 2):" ICANN must have ready prior to the opening of the Application Submission Period a mechanism to evaluate the risk of name collisions in the New gTLD evaluation process as well as during the transition to delegation phase." 00:56:47 Justine Chew: @Anne, that recommendation talks about "a mechanism". The only reference to "a test" is in an Implementation Guidance. 00:57:15 Justine Chew: And I am saying a mechanism does not have to be a test. 00:57:57 Anne Aikman-Scalese: Just as a reminder, The Board comment on the Sub Pro section on the Initial Report re name collisions was that this presented an opportunity for Sub Pro and NCAP to "work together". 00:58:37 Anne Aikman-Scalese: @Justine - it seems to me a mechanism has to be based on data. 00:59:09 Justine Chew: +1 Rubens, +1 Greg. I don't believe anyone is arguing against that @Anne, and I don't believe what NCAP DG is doing conflicts with anything SubPro is proposing. 01:01:00 Anne Aikman-Scalese: I was not suggesting it conflicts - I am suggesting that cooperation may mean the two groups achieve the same goal and could somehow produce the same recommendation to the Board. It would be amazing if it could end up being a joint recommendation from NCAP and Sub Pro. improving organizational effectiveness in ICANN is much to be desired. 01:07:53 Justine Chew: Ditto on my earlier comment on Study 1 Report 01:08:24 Jothan Frakes: would like to see some narrative in outputs that helps a reader dismiss concerns of bias for or against new TLDs and how the source data might have been impacted by artificial vs organic use 01:09:05 Jothan Frakes: ok 01:09:13 Jothan Frakes: can make that less loose 01:11:37 Anne Aikman-Scalese: Thank you JIm et al