Page History

3071 ICA ALAC Telecon

(2007-06-12)

Legend

O: Operator

Name: Speaker's first name.

Name L: Speaker's first name plus first initial of last name if more than one person is participating with the same first name.

Name?: Speaker's identity is uncertain.

Male: Unidentified male speaker.

Female: Unidentified female speaker.

SP: Unsure if speaker is male or female.

-ation If it appears that only the beginning of a word was missed because the audio cut out, the part of the word that was heard will be indicated. If the context indicates what the word should be, the whole word will be displayed to make it easier for the reader. However, if there are a variety of possible words, only the part of the word that was heard will be displayed.

Start of Audio

Male: Annette, how are you doing?

Annette: Alright, alright. It’s really hot here, you know. You wouldn’t expect, you know, I’m wearing this nice dress, it’s really hot. And I’m not cold at all.

Male: Good for you.

Annette: But I love hot weather. Oh, sorry, Lilly 00:00:22 go ahead.

Male: Yes. Be prepared to have some warm jacket or whatever in San Juan for the air conditioning.

Annette: Oh yes, I will, I will have my sweater, you know, with the…

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

…which goes up the neck.

Alan: Alan here.

Many speakers: Hi Alan.

Sebastien: So, while we’re waiting, how happy are you, Alan, for the Issues Report on Domain Tasting?

Alan: I’m very happy with it.

Sebastien: I found that the GNSO Council didn’t discuss about this in the latest meeting, did they?

Alan: No, the latest meeting had already been scheduled for discussion on the gTLD paper, and they decided that this was a major enough issue that it needed a good discussion, and deferred it to San Juan.

Sebastien: Okay.

Female: Inaudible 00:01:20

Sebastien: I mean, at least staff recommended that it’s worth for the PDP.

Alan: I’m sorry, your voice is breaking up. I couldn’t hear what you said.

Sebastien: Yes, this is inaudible 00:01:29. Well, I’m relatively happy that the staff concluded that it’s worth for a PDP.

Alan: Yes. If they hadn’t done that, it would have been a lot more difficult. Now, it’s not at all clear how the GNSO…

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

…will frame the Task Group, the actual work. That remains to be seen.

Sebastien: And I read some comments from Ross Rader inaudible 00:02:00. Ross was relatively inaudible.

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

Alan: Yes he was, but he’s allowed to inaudible.

Nick: Hello. Sorry for being a bit late, everybody, I had to find an office that was free.

Alan: Nick, there’s a horrible echo and noise on the line, at least for me anyway.

Nick: I can hear nothing. Does anyone else here it?

Annette: There’s a big difference between Alan and Izumi, yes.

Nick: Is it any better when I pick up, or is it just happening?

Alan: No, it hasn’t changed.

Nick: Hold on. Let me do the star zero trick.

Alan: Do you want me to call back in?

Nick: Well, try that, and if it doesn’t work then…

Annette: Well, Alan, Alan. It happens to me too.

Alan: Let me get them on the line.

Cheryl: I really wish that n equals file six wasn’t there 00:02:46.

Alan: I didn’t understand whoever said that.

Cheryl: It’s Cheryl, and when there was only about five of us on the line, there was no echo. In fact, somebody jinxed us and commented on it, which I did point out to them.

Female: Alan, I think it was when you joined that it got bad inaudible 00:03:04.

phone beeps to indicate that someone has joined

Alan: Well, I can call back in easily. Let me call back and see if it makes any difference.

Nick: There, check it now.

Annette: No, still bad.

Cheryl: No, it’s…

Female: Alan will try to call in again.

Cheryl: See, you’re not echoing.

Nick: Hopefully they’ll track it back.

Operator: Hi there, this is the Operator. It’s coming from Hong Xue’s line.

Nick: Um, Hong Xue. Can you get on her line and tell her?

Operator: Yes, no problem. I’ll do that now for you. Thanks.

Nick: It’s coming from Hong’s line. The operator is about to go talk to her.

Wendy: Yes, but did we ever get the problem resolved with the messages taking forever to mute and un-mute?

Nick: Yes, I talked to them about it, but it’s a systemic thing. They can’t get rid of those notifications, unfortunately.

Wendy: Inaudible 00:03:52 you have the same complaint she had last time, which is that she can’t logically participate.

Cheryl: Yes, it’s not going to be good. And how is the second caller in? We got to n equals five with me number 1, her number 2. When n equals 6, then she started to be… the result of an echo? I’m sorry, I find that difficult to understand.

Nick: Yes, well I’m wondering how she’s connecting in, and maybe they could call…

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

…her, or I could connect her up by…

Cheryl: Because, yes, she was connected, there wasn’t any echo until we seemed to get to some form of critical mass.

Operator: Hi, this is the operator. Unfortunately, she seems to be using Skype, so she can’t mute herself by pressing star 6.

Male: Right.

Operator: Sorry, it may be a problem.

Nick: Is it possible to ring her? Can you find out if you can call her at a number she’s at?

Operator: Yes, I can find out, no problem.

Nick: She’s using Skype, and they’re going to try and call her at her number.

Cheryl: At least it makes a bit of sense if she uses it 00:04:59.

Nick: Well, hopefully, hopefully.

Cheryl: It certainly wasn’t a problem until we got to a certain point, because… sound cuts out 15 seconds

_phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

Annette: Who joined?

Wendy: Mr. Static.

Cheryl: We’re all so desperate to avoid the echo, do you think?

Male: Is it still happening?

Female: No.

Annette: I don’t know. Well, it sounds better.

Male: Much better.

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

Operator: Hong Xue now joined.

Nick: Hong, can you hear us okay?

Hong: Oh, right, it’s okay now.

Nick: Oh, thank God, yay!

overtalking 00:06:15

Hong: But the problem is that they charge double way.

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

They charge me for receiving calls.

Annette?: Oh, that’s fun.

Siavash: Hi, this is Siavash coming in.

Male: Hi Siavash. Hong, send me the bill.

Hong: Well, I don’t know how to send you the bill.

Male: I’ll send you an e-mail, but yes, you can expense the bill for these things.

Hong: Oh, I use a prepaid card, so I don’t know.

Annette: Send him the prepaid card.

Male: Well, that’s all right. You could, you know, make a copy of the prepaid card. Laughter. As your receipt. No, it’s okay…

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

…don’t worry, we’ll…

Hong: Okay, we need a telecom expert…

Alan: Okay, Alan is back. Overtalking. Apparently coordinator 811 went on lunch break. Laughter.

Nick: It wasn’t you, Alan, you’ll be happy to know. It was Hong on Skype and she’s now been called by them.

Hong: I am sorry for this trouble.

Alan: In any case, I got to listen to their music for a long time.

Male: And that’s exciting, we know.

Alan: They don’t pick music that’s to my taste.

Nick: Is there such a thing… does anyone ever experience hold music that they actually like?

Male: Yes, actually.

Nick: I have one time only I can think of.

Annette: Nick?

Nick: Yes?

Annette: I want to 00:07:37 know about Veronica Cretu. Was it that you wanted to call her on Skype or something? Or did she want to call in? How did it work?

Nick: In which… I’m not sure what…

Cheryl: For Veronica. For Veronica?

Annette: There is a Veronica. This is one of our new…

Nick: I know who she is. I’m saying I’m not quite sure what you’re asking me in relation to her.

Annette: I think Cheryl asked who Veronica is. So, well okay. I will Skype her and ask what’s going on.

Nick: Yes, my Skype is not working at this network for whatever reason, so…

Hong?: Do we have everyone here? Inaudible 00:08:27

Annette: She says she is waiting for you, Nick, to be added to the meeting.

Nick: I can’t add her by Skype, because my Skype doesn’t work from here. Just ask her to tell you what number to call her on, and we’ll have them ring her.

Annette: Okay, okay.

Nick: Because my Skype doesn’t work. This network doesn’t allow it, for whatever reason.

Annette: Okay, okay, okay.

Female: Is Sebastien there?

Sebastien: Yes. Yes, I’m here.

Female: Hi. Hi Sebastien.

Sebastien: Hi inaudible.

Nick: I’m going to go to the Operator and make sure that they’re calling Jacqueline. I have no idea what’s the number.

Annette: Nick, Nick, Nick. Do you have it?

Nick: Hold on. What is it?

Annette: Okay, 0373 22 27 45 04.

Nick: 04. Great, okay, I’m going to go get her and see what they’re doing with Jacqueline, because they’re supposed to be ringing her. Be right back.

Cheryl: Probably has something to do with that launch 00:09:44 broke down and got caught in…

Female: So is it right we just have three quarters of an hour left and then the budget discussion will start?

Alan: That’s right.

Cheryl: You’ve got to love these calls, haven’t you?

Siavash?: I don’t know why they have deteriorated, it used to be…

Alan: That’s not the word I’d use.

Annette: Did anyone read those budget things, slides carefully?

Several speakers: No. No. Not me.

Wendy: I asked if we could send them to the public list and got no response.

Annette: Yes, I’m also wondering. Actually, well, I will ask for that when Nick gets back. Because, Cheryl, we also got something on the budget committee, some information. And actually I thought we would share those information before the telephone conference, but it’s not…

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

Nick: Okay, they’re dialling now.

Alan: Why don’t we ask them…

Wendy: We have two requests to share information on the public lists. The budget slides, and some other things, apparently.

Nick: The budget slides, we should just ask. I think it’s okay, but we should just double check with Doug when he comes on, but I think it’s fine.

Wendy: And apparently the budget committee got something the rest of us would like to see.

Nick: Um… yes, well let’s discuss that during the budget actual conversation.

Wendy: Well let’s… I’d like to see the materials overtalking 00:11:27.

Nick: Yes, but that’s the point. There’s a reason why you don’t have them yet, and that’s part of the conversation to be had on the budget call.

Annette: On the budget budget call or on the ALAC call?

Nick: The budget call that comes right after this call at 14:30.

Alan: Who is this budget call at 14:30 for?

Nick: You.

Alan: Just the ALAC?

Nick: The ALAC and the Secretariats.

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

Alan: That was not clear.

Jacqueline: Hello, everyone, it’s Jacqueline.

Many speakers: Hi Jacqueline. Hello.

Cheryl: How long did you have to wait before you could join us?

Jacqueline: Fifteen minutes.

Cheryl: Oh dear.

Jacqueline: A long time.

Alan: I’m sorry. We’re docking you a quarter of your pay. Laughter

Cheryl: This is ridiculous. However.

Wendy?: Yes inaudible 00:12:16 not very competent.

Annette: So you managed…

Jacqueline: Is everyone all there?

Annette: …to call Veronica?

Male: Have they sent…

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

Female: Hello.

Female: Coordinator 811 will be with you shortly. Laughter

Alan: I wouldn’t believe that if I were you. We’re not getting the music.

Wendy: Sorry, I don’t have anything that bad on my hard drive.

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

Cheryl?: So who else is here?

Annette: Inaudible 00:12:55 We’ve almost… Hong.

Hong: Yes, Hong’s right here. We’re waiting for Vittorio and Veronica.

Annette: Nick, could you call her?

Nick: They are ringing her now. They just jumped on my line to say… to repeat the number. They needed a different number. They had 07 instead of 04. I don’t know.

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

Operator: Veronique now joined.

Nick: Oh great.

Veronica: Hello?

Many speakers: Hi. Hello.

Veronica: Are you there? This is Veronica Cretu from Moldova.

Female: Oh right. Hello.

Male: Hello Veronica.

Veronica: Sorry for joining you so late.

Female: Nick, Carlos says no one has called him.

Nick: Right.

Jacqueline: Okay, I’ll just take the chance to welcome Sebastien and Veronica on our telephone conference. Our new European ALAC members.

Veronica: Thanks a lot.

Sebastien: Thank you very much.

Jacqueline: You’re welcome.

Cheryl: And you can see what the first half of the meeting is like.

Male: Nasty.

Annette: Don’t think that this is half of it. We still have a long time to go.

Cheryl: Well, they’ve got this one sandwiched between the budget one and… anyway.

Jacqueline: Okay. Everybody got the e-mails from the liaison?

Male: Yes.

Jacqueline: And had the chance to read them?

Female: No.

Jacqueline: No?

Veronica?: But I received them.

Alan: If we have a quorum, I suggest we start.

Many speakers: Right. Oh yeah.

Annette: And the agenda?

Jacqueline: Has everyone read the agenda? Is there anything to add to the agenda besides Wendy’s discussion of the travel policy, which I’m about to add in?

Male: Could you speak louder please?

Jacqueline: Oh, sorry. I have to apologize. I am actually sick. Quite. So my energy is going to be very, very low. But I’m here. So, is there anything else to add to the agenda besides Wendy’s wish to discuss the new travel policy?

Annette: So I would like to add the budget issue of the ALAC before the budget call with inaudible 00:15:31.

Jacqueline: Okay.

Cheryl: Well, we’re awake. Even me.

Jacqueline: Oh dear. I’m not sure we’re going to get through all this, because there’s only one hour before the… well, 45 minutes now. Okay, so with those two additions to the agenda, if we make them, is everybody okay with the agenda? Can we adopt the agenda?

Cheryl: Yes.

Veronica: I am fine with the agenda.

Izumi?: No problem.

Jacqueline: Okay, anybody not here? Officially?

Female: Alice 00:16:20 is not here. Who else?

Female: And the other two inaudible members.

Jacqueline: Latin America?

Annette: Apart from inaudible is missing right. Or did I hear?

Jacqueline: Or callers are trying to get in. I don’t know about Jose.

Female: Is Nick there? No. Okay.

Jacqueline: Everybody had a chance to take a look at the minutes of the previous meeting and/or the transcription of the minutes, okay?

Female: Not the transcription.

Annette: Oh, I didn’t read the transcription, because I thought the minutes were okay, but…

Cheryl: Oh well. I don’t think a transcription adds a great deal. “Lady said this. Man said that.” Laughter.

Jacqueline: All we have to agree on is that the minutes are okay without correction, and then we can move on.

Cheryl: Yes, I’ll move that.

Jacqueline: Or make any corrections to the minutes.

Annette?: Well, there is one question. I did not get the whole discussion about the pro working group. What happens there. And I don’t know if that was part of our last telephone conference call or the one before. I’m confused now.

Cheryl: The which? Sorry I didn’t hear what you…

Jacqueline: That was the one before.

Annette?: Ah, okay.

Jacqueline: That was when we were discussing whether it made… Who would be the liaison for the Vienna pro working group. And given that it was nearly finished and that they required that people listen to all of the previous conference calls, nobody was willing to do that, really. But the report has come out, and we can make comments on that. The people who are interested.

Annette: It’s large. It’s really big.

Wendy: It’s also as skewed as we expected it to be, in that it’s all about protecting intellectual property.

Alan: That’s all they discussed, though.

Wendy: Overtalking 00:18:30 Rather than protecting anybody else’s rights or interests.

Jacqueline: Right. So, but to get back to these minutes of May 8th. Does anyone have any changes to make to the minutes?

Alan: I have no changes. I would like in the future that they be a little bit more detailed to reflect what actually transpired at the meeting. But I move that we accept these.

Jacqueline: Second?

Sebastien: Yes, I do second.

Jacqueline: Any objections? Good. Right.

Action items of the previous meeting. I can say right now I was supposed to send a document to Denise and I didn’t, because I’ve been in bed for three weeks.

Many speakers: Oh my God. I hope you feel better.

Jacqueline: Wendy, we’re supposed to do a more specific document on the research request.

Wendy: Is that inaudible 00:19:41? No, I don’t believe I was.

Jacqueline: No?

Annette: It’s hard to hear you both… both of you. I don’t understand.

Jacqueline: Okay, sorry about that. Action item. Wiki ranking systems of top ten items, and ranking of top ten items.

Annette?: Wendy, has anybody done the, did we, did anybody write…

Wendy: Yes, Cheryl very helpfully noted….

Cheryl: Sorry about that, but…

Annette?: Nobody else did. Okay, what do we want to do about that? Forward it to the next, make sure that we… Can everybody agree that we will do it for the next meeting? Which is actually not a teleconference, but a meeting in San Juan.

Wendy: I think we, perhaps, this isn’t the way to do it. But I think our constituents would like to know what issues the ALAC committee thinks are the most important. So that the constituents can then give their feedback on items to add to the agenda or to change. And so that was why this was phrased as a request to the committee members to add to this list.

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

Perhaps there’s a better way to do it.

Nick: Sorry, guys, I got… I had to dial back in.

Female: Oh.

Alan: Wendy, given this huge change in turnover in people on this committee, I think this kind of thing is best done in person, or at least after people have talked to each other or are familiar with each other. As interesting as web-based tools are, I don’t think it’s effective for really getting people thinking and working together. I don’t know if we have time in San Juan for it or not, but I just don’t think it’s an effective way of mobilizing this group, who… many of whom are new to the committee, and others are busy already with what’s on their plates. A personal opinion.

Sebastien: Overtalking 00:22:04 I don’t think it will be a very good topic for our face to face meeting in San Juan, so… Because that hopefully the last inaudible and we will have the people who are not yet completely elected. But I think that it’s an important topic that we need to, under… with the full new ALAC members.

Female: Yeah.

Alan: Are we having a meeting on Sunday the 24th, just to get together and just know each other?

Annette: I thought we have a dinner on Saturday night, don’t we?

Cheryl: Some of us won’t be there until midnight.

Female: Some of us will not be there on Saturday.

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

Operator: Excuse me. Carlos Aguirre now joined.

Carlos: Hi for all. Carlos here.

Many speakers: Hi Carlos. Buenos dias.

Jacqueline: Okay, so we will move the top ten 00:23:11 policy if you inaudible someone face to face.

Female: Yup.

Alan: What was that? Sorry. Trying to keep up.

Jacqueline: We will move the top ten items to a face to face, because the on-line tool seems to be not that great for getting new people together to discuss, because these need discussing.

Alan: Okay.

Cheryl: Another section I am volunteering move to a face to face. 00:23:48

Male: Okay, let’s move.

Jacqueline: Okay, Ombudsman. Well, everyone saw the inaudible.

Cheryl: Sigh. Sigh.

Male: Amen.

Jacqueline: And the report is with the Board, the Board is free to discuss it. And do we need to discuss it any more?

Female: No.

Izumi?: There was a suggestion to have a meeting with an ombudsman in San Juan. Do we agree or not, one way or the other?

Male: Did you say you have a suggestion to meet him?

Izumi?: I read somebody’s suggestion, I think Vittorio perhaps suggested to have a meeting in San Juan.

Jacqueline: I think it was Robert Derrah 00:24:29.

Izumi?: Yeah, I’m sorry. I’m not too keen to do that.

Wendy: Me neither.

Male: You are or you’re not?

Alan: We didn’t get much out of the previous meeting.

Annette: I mean, he didn’t say a word in the last meeting.

Male: Hmm?

Izumi: My suggestion perhaps is, let’s see how the board reacts and then decide.

Cheryl: Okay. Anyone else have any opinions on meeting with the Ombudsman?

Male: I guess the suggestion was that if they have a meeting with him, do it in the presence of the general council. Otherwise we’ll be very polite and he’ll be very polite, and we won’t get anywhere.

Jacqueline: Well, no. What I think… if we meet with him, the agenda will have to be very specific, with all the things that he says that he’s given us, and explained to us. And we think… And I checked the minutes and he hasn’t. We would have to be very specific and make him, if we meet with him, make him give us the various information that he says he’s already given us. But it is not supported by the minutes, by the transcripts of the meeting.

Alan: I don’t believe there’s any reason to meet with him. On the other hand, if we want to give him an opportunity to explain to the new members what the Ombudsman is supposedly all about…

Annette?: Oh, come on, Alan. This is…

Alan: Overtalking 00:25:50 I’m saying if we want to go through that process that’s the only reason. Other than that, I see no need for a meeting.

Annette: But for new members, I think there are so many people they should meet first, to get introduced to. And I think GNSO and other functions are really basic for our work.

Alan: I wasn’t suggesting it. I was saying that’s the only reason that I would sanction it.

Annette: Okay, okay.

Jacqueline: Okay. So if we have time, and if we have the General Council and if we have a really strong agenda we can meet with him, if he asks to meet with us. Is that what we’re…

Alan: I think he’s expecting us to invite him, from the way I gather from the various documents.

Male: My suggestion is we don’t give this prominence, because we’ve got so many other things to do.

Annette: Right, right. So we leave out the Ombudsman for now.

Jacqueline: Other action items. Both 00:27:08 of us got in touch with the ccNSO. We have his report to do. Christina was asked about the inaudible. I had a long back and forth with them and they have agreed that any additional thing inaudible all the countries. Any people on the IDN working group? Nick? How many people are on the IDN working group?

Nick: I haven’t checked the mailing list lately. Hong, have you?

Hong: Oh, I did check the mailing list. We have, apart from Nick and me and Wendy, we have two subscribers.

Wendy: Overtalking 00:27:53 while we have a list set up, there’s no discussion on it. So I would strongly repeat my suggestion that we use the ALAC list and subject headers to allow people to filter messages.

Jacqueline: Hong, what do you think about that?

Carlos?: I’m sorry. I didn’t hear it too well.

Hong: Sorry, I can’t hear you so well. Would you please repeat?

Jacqueline: What do you want to do about getting people on the IDN working group? Wendy suggested that you start the discussion on the public ALAC list.

Hong: Well, it has always been on the public ALAC list. Otherwise we won’t have the two subscribers. One from North America, another from Asia.

Nick: Could we involve the secretariats, and ask them to insure that one person from each region who’s interested joins?

Hong: Oh that’s a… yes, of course, I strongly suggest that. We should actually approach the secretariat in each region of the… each RALO, and ask them to disseminate the message to the At-Large.

Nick: For the other working groups too, but especially yours.

Hong: Oh, right, okay. But if it’s the ALAC IDN working group, I feel it should primarily constitute the members from At-Large communities. But if other members would like to join in as observers, they should be welcome.

Jacqueline: Okay, so Nick, you’ll send an e-mail to the secretariats?

Nick: Yes.

Jacqueline: Thank you. Research required.

Siavash: I have sort of a suggestion. You know, considering the fact that both GNSO and ccNSO have been working on this IDN for some time. Starting a new working group, I don’t know how wise that is. Maybe we should try to have a stronger presence on both these working groups instead, and join in with the efforts that have been going on.

Nick: Well, that’s the idea, Siavash.

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

Operator: Jose Soriano now joined.

Nick: That’s kind of the idea, Siavash, it’s really that the working group concept was for those within the At-Large community to decide how they wanted to break up the work of working with the other constituencies. Overtalking 00:30:37 Not that the working groups would be a different thing, really.

Siavash: Okay, that I agree.

Hong: Siavash, I’ve… last time I was muted, so I was not able to explain the idea of the IDN working group. I see this upcoming working group to assume the talk from two perspectives. One is to reinforce ALAC’s participation in the pre-existing IDN processes. In both PAC-GNSO and ccNSO. And the second perspective is to see whether ALACs or the At-Large community can contribute more to the IDN policy making process. So I’m thinking maybe it’s not very wise to repeat the policy proposal that’s already been made by GNSO, especially. We can present the users’ preferences, the users’ demands for IDN to ICANN. So maybe I want to talk with you later about this. But I’m thinking maybe what I want to present is not another draft of a policy paper, another proposal, but a kind of survey. A polling result. Which is really rooted, derived from the At-Large community. So this is my thinking about this new working group.

Male: Mmm-hmmm.

Hong: Yes?

Jacqueline: Okay.

Male: So how…

Nick: We just need to do a bit more recruiting, really.

Hong: Yes.

Nick: But this is brand new. I mean, we’ve only been at it for a month, so…

Jacqueline: Okay, so we start with the secretariats and try and get more people involved?

Nick: And in the North American and LAC 00:32:50 regions obviously this month we can talk it up more.

Jacqueline: Okay, the research requests. Nick, you talked to Denise about that, and we got the information available.

Nick: Indeed.

Jacqueline: What did Denise say about the report…?

Nick: Well, as I said when I forwarded the e-mail, as I suspected, if we’re to engage in a survey of this scope, it would be not trivially cheap. I mean, we’d probably have a consultant do it, considering the number of registrars there are. We’d need an idea of what it is that the information would be used for.

Female: Excuse me.

Jacqueline: Proposal. A basic proposal.

Nick: Yeah, I mean a basic… not a 50 page document or anything like that, but something that makes clear what the value of the information would be, and why it would be valuable to the At-Large community, and what would be done with it.

Jacqueline: Wendy.

Wendy: Yes?

Jacqueline: Did you have a chance to look at the material that has been… that ICANN already had, that Nick found? I’ve looked at it in the past.

Annette: I’m irritated about this type of discussion because we already made the decision that we would like to have this survey, so it is rather the question if there is enough money to do that, or if in the respect to the money it costs, if the outcome inaudible 00:34:41, then this is something staff should tell, if they doubt that.

Jacqueline: Well, I think that it is perfectly reasonable to ask for a proposal for the project.

Annette: Oh yeah.

Jacqueline: As long as it’s like a one-pager, and it’s something simple that says, “Okay, this is what we want to do, we want to get all this information, this is the reason that we think it’s going to be important, and this what we would like to do with it.” I don’t see… I mean, that’s kind of starting off and doing the terms of reference inaudible for the consultant anyway, because they can’t just tell a consultant. Yeah, so research stuff. You have to give them some parameters.

Cheryl: Oh, some of us would love it as consultants. We’d think it’s a marvellous thing.

Alan: Some of us consultants prefer if we don’t have a framework.

Cheryl: Exactly right.

Jacqueline: I think all consultants would prefer if we don’t have a framework. You can just take the money and do what you want.

Male: You have the money.

Cheryl: inaudible

Alan: And I also suggest we get back on track.

Jacqueline: We need to… Right. Obviously we will need to do a Terms of Reference. Somebody will need to do a Terms of Reference. I’m sure staff will do that if we give them the framework of the Terms of Reference, that basically says “This is what we want to do, this is what we want to find out, and this is where it will go from there.” Wendy? Your research.

Wendy: Well, I’d like first to address my concerns over whether I will even make it to San Juan. And then I will consider whether I’m willing to take on some assignments.

Nick: Well this is from… This is an action item from last meeting.

Wendy: At which point I wrote up the questions and sent them on.

Nick: This is after that.

Wendy: I filled that action item.

Jacqueline: Okay, let’s postpone that for a bit. I already said I haven’t done a thing about hiring Jean 00:36:56, because I’ve been ill, and I will deal with that as soon as I can. And the Issues Report to GNSO, Alan did that. And right. Move on to the end of the reports. Did everyone… All of the liaisons sent in reports by e-mail. Hong sent hers a while ago. Everybody else sent yesterday. Did everyone else… did anyone have a chance to look at them, and does anyone have any questions or discussion on those reports? Board? Did anyone have a chance to read the treasurers e-mail about the Board Reports?

Wendy: I haven’t heard from him, so it wouldn’t be…

Siavash?: Well, I read it, Vittorio’s one among others, and just to connect to the ombudsman thing, I think that both will be discussed on the 18th of June about the ombudsman, or likely to discuss, it’s one week before San Juan. So it would give us a good sort of idea for what the direction it would be. So in case we may have, where A is a meeting with Ombudsman or B we discuss with the board when we meet with them. This was my reaction anyway, for the report. Liaison report.

Wendy: I would be quite curious to hear more details on the Board’s discussion of my and Patrick’s posts on concerns about RALO formation process.

Male: Mm-hmm.

Female: Inaudible 00:38:27.

Siavash?: So perhaps we can ask Vittorio to report back after the Board meeting. Before San Juan, onto the list. That would work pretty well.

Jacqueline: Okay. Then the discussion in Asia Pacific about the meeting being switched to Los Angeles?

Cheryl: Well, yes. Inaudible. Obviously…

Male: California is part of Asia Pacific, I guess. Pacific, anyway.

Cheryl: Overtalking 00:39:10. Look. The fact that we are assured that we will be on the rotation in the beginning of 2008 simply means that what has now turned out to be a rather longish process through no fault of our own is getting the inaudible signatures getting put on the MOU. At least it’s seen as a little bit of light at the end of the tunnel. We would be… have been delighted to gather to do it by the close of 2007 inaudible the meetings, but I think secretariat is, correct me if I’m wrong, but there’s nothing much we can do about it and so we will move forward and get our work plans going as if nothing had changed.

Siavash?: Just to add, it perhaps relates to the later reporting of the regional activities. There is a proposal to have an Asia Pacific ALS meeting in the end of July, which is not finalized yet. There are certain pros and cons.

Jacqueline: Okay.

Cheryl: That’s more of an internal ALAC, an internal AP RALO, than extending to the ALAC as such.

Jacqueline: Okay.

Siavash?: It’s a plan B. Well, plan C.

Cheryl: Yes, so whatever other letter we end up being forced into.

Jacqueline: Anything else on the Board report?

Hong: Well, I was wondering. Vittorio is there something you would think makes sense to address in a Board meeting? What do you think are important issues at San Juan? Something you could, you know…

Wendy: I don’t think Vittorio is on the phone.

Female: No, he’s not here.

Hong: He’s not?

Jacqueline: Wendy, you were going to… you had something?

Hong: But he was in the beginning, wasn’t he?

Wendy: No, I haven’t heard him.

Hong: Oh.

Jacqueline: You wanted to say something.

Wendy: Yes, he said that my and Patrick’s blog posts on the RALO elections spawned some discussion on how well ALAC is doing. And I wanted to get further detail on that and to be offered opportunities to join further in that discussion.

Nick: I have noted, by the way, that you’ve… for the summary minutes… that you’ve asked for this, Wendy.

Wendy: Thanks.

Jacqueline: Okay. WHOIS. Any activity on WHOIS, Wendy?

Wendy: The three sub-working groups of the Working Group have concluded their work, and merged back into the main Working Group. I am sceptical that there will ever be progress on WHOIS, period. Inaudible 00:42:06.

Female: Why?

Wendy: Because it’s very clear that there are some who like the status quo, and those have enough political power to stall any change from the status quo, so…

Jacqueline: Is there anything that we would like to do to try and push that?

Wendy: Other than getting up in arms about the way the whole process works, a specific proposal that I have made for the general ICANN policy process is that policies, even consensus policies, should have their own sunsets. Where a consensus around existing policy has to be reconfirmed, rather than something that once achieved consensus lasting forever because nobody can reach a consensus to change it.

Jacqueline: So is there anything, any action that lobbying or protesting or walking with placards outside the General Assembly overtalking 00:43:18 could do to get them to listen to us.

Wendy: Everyone should try to register for the San Juan meeting as Ann Onymous or Andrew Onymous and see how far we get. That stunt had more political impact than hours of participation on teleconferences ever has. I recommend many A. N. Onymous badges.

Sebastien?: Well, I think the real sort of cause of this is the structure and the process of the GNSO itself, and now it’s under review. And so, unless… until we have sort of structural change, I think we wouldn’t get out of this standoff or frozen inaudible 00:44:12.

Jacqueline: Okay.

Wendy: Yes, so I suppose we can also push for adoption of the GNSO reform. Yeah right.

Jacqueline: Okay. Anything on… Any discussion on IDNs? Anybody has any thoughts on overtalking.

Siavash: Can I add something… yes. I can add a little bit to what I said about the ccNSO. The two largest groups of ccTLDs, Centre and AP TLD, have put out similar proclamations, if you want, about IDNs. They both said the following. One is, ask ITN to let each ccTLD come up with one candidate for IDN dot IDN, in other words, IDN to be put into root. And that’s the first proposal. The second is that this be put up for a six month comment period. If somebody, some government or anybody else, objects to this particular choice, they would let it be known within six months and then after that these would be put into the root. As, you know, the first experiment or the first step.

Nick: So, sorry Siavash, you’re saying that the six month comment period would apply to the IDN dot IDN string?

Siavash: Yes, the one that each ccTLD selects. You know, each ccTLD is allowed to select one, just one, string, and then this is put up for comment. If somebody objects to that, for serious reasons, that could be taken away. But if there’s no serious objection then that would be put into the root after six months.

Hong: But Siavash, oh sorry, is this only for…

Siavash: This is just a proposal.

Hong: Well, this is only for ccTLDs, right? It’s not…

Siavash: Yes, this is just for ccTLDs. But of course what they’re saying is they’re more or less in a line with the GNSO proposal, in other words. The proposal, the one straight 00:46:33 proposal, should conform to the guidelines of GNSO.

Hong: I think…

Siavash: They just want to get this thing started.

Jacqueline: So basically, they’re trying to push it to go ahead, and say, “Listen, let’s just pick one, let people have six months to object, and if not let’s just go ahead.”

Hong: But I really have a question for Vittorio. I want to know what is the timetable for the side of Board for this IDN test? It’s a three stage test. But this is the third stage now, this open test at root inaudible 00:47:11 level. They just published the rules or procedures for the test, for public comment. But there’s no timetable for the open test. I don’t…

Siavash: I guess people are hoping that by pushing, some timetable will develop or something.

Jacqueline: Okay. Nick can you make a note to ask Vittorio that as well.

Nick: Yes, I will do. And on this subject, just so you know, I am trying to get together as much At-Large friendly IDN information as possible. For San Juan. There is a considerable amount more information posted at the Wiki now…

Female: Right.

Nick: …but we are still looking at some really important things like “IDN for Dummies,” as Hong and I have taken to calling it. I think Hong coined the phrase.

Hong: Right, right, right.

Nick: I haven’t lost track of this, and it’s somewhat tortuous to try and find it or get it done, but one way or another we will have it.

Hong: Well, Nick, I haven’t seen that new ccTLD IDN proclamation. If you could put it on our IDN policy information page it would be very nice.

Nick: I will.

Siavash: But this is not a ccNSO proclamation. It’s the two groupings of ccTLDs, Centre and AP TLD. If you look at the AP TLD site, you’ll see it.

Hong: Oh, right, that is the reason I didn’t see it. Okay, right.

Nick: I can put up a link to that though, definitely.

Jacqueline: Everyone has seen Hong’s IDN policy information page, right?

Female: Very good. Thank you very much, Hong. It’s beautiful.

Hong: Inaudible 00:48:51 Nick. I made some additions.

Nick: Hong really put a lot of it into it, and I put some, and I tried to do that for the GNSO page, the same GNSO page. And I’ll keep working on the other pages so that there’s a building core of information there for people.

Jacqueline: Okay, anything else on IDN, discussion on IDN?

Hong: Well, sorry Jacqueline. I want to know whether Alan is still our liaison to GNSO?

Female: Yes.

Hong: If so, alright, Alan, are you still there? I want to know what is the PDP issue on IDN? I heard a new TTLD TDT is going on. And whether the IDN is going to be interpreted 00:49:33 into that PDP or is going to have a new PDP. This still is very unclear.

Alan: There’s been very little discussion on IDNs.

Hong: Inaudible

Alan: Even inaudible has been when there was some. To be honest, I don’t remem- I’m not participating in any IDN activities.

Hong: Alright, see…

Alan: And I’m not even sure at this point if there is an… I think there is an ongoing one, but I really don’t know, to be honest.

Hong: Alright. I just wonder whether there is some discussion in the new gTLD discussion.

Alan: Oh, there certainly is reference to it, but… and it complements it, they’re not trying to replicate the IDN work in it.

Hong: Oh, right.

Alan: There’s certainly an awareness of it in terms… regarding the recommendations on, you know, similar names and confusion with names, there is acknowledgement and understanding that they’re talking about IDN names, not just English language names. But there’s no attempt to redo the work. And there has been no closure on what “similar” means. Is it only visual, is it sounding, is it, you know, various other forms?

Hong: Right. Okay. I see. Thanks.

Jacqueline: Is there any way, Alan, that you could get some of that material, I don’t know if it’s written or whatever, to Hong to see where…

Alan: Anything that I have is on the GNSO website. There’s nothing secret there.

Jacqueline: Okay.

Alan: I just don’t remember. It’s been a number… There certainly was some IDN discussion, IDN meetings, essentially public meetings, at Lisbon. I don’t believe, I’m not aware of, or at least I haven’t paid attention to, any IDN issues that have been going on since then. There may or may not be a Working Group still active. I really don’t remember.

Hong: Okay.

Jacqueline: Okay, inaudible 00:51:42. Did you get that list of 19 or 20 or however many Working Groups?

Nick: I did. I will… I promise to send it around here. Suzy sent it to me, but she sent it to me in a very difficult to read format, so as soon as…

Jacqueline: Okay, inaudible should know if the GNSO does have an IDN, a sub, that. Siavash? ccNSO.

Siavash: Um…

Alan: Excuse me, may I point out we have another call in five minutes. Is there anything we need to do?

Annette?: Is there a possibility that we postpone this call for 10 minutes? Or 15?

Cheryl: No.

Nick: Um, not…

Annette?: Or is it possible that after that call we finish our agenda?

Cheryl: We could reconvene.

Nick: There’s certainly no problem from here. Call-wise or anything else, for doing that, if you like.

Annette: We don’t necessarily need a full hour for this budget issue.

Jacqueline: Okay, then. We’re going to reconvene after this budget call?

Wendy: I’m sorry, I won’t be able to join. But I want very strongly to protest the abusive use of travel…

Jacqueline: Okay. Wendy, wait, wait, wait. We still have four minutes. So. Do we want to reconvene after the budget call?

Many speakers: Yes.

Jacqueline: Yes?

Siavash: Well, it depends on how long it’s going to be.

Annette: No, I cannot. And let’s try the budget call to make not a full hour.

Jacqueline: Okay.

Hong: How long the budget call will be? One hour?

Nick: It depends on how many questions, I think, more than anything else. But between a half an hour and an hour, I’m guessing.

Jacqueline: Okay, so we have no objections to…

Wendy: Yes, there is an objection. I said I cannot join.

Jacqueline: No, that’s right, you cannot join.

Cheryl: That’s an inability, not an objection.

Alan: Then may we give Wendy the remaining four minutes?

Jacqueline: Yes! That’s what I wanted to do. If we’re going to reconvene, then Wendy, can you do your travel issue now? Since you can’t come after. And we will postpone all the other items until after. Wendy, you have the floor.

Wendy: I’m… yes. I am quite concerned that the new travel policy is being used as a way to exclude participation. That after complying with any deadlines that I had been given, I have been told that I wasn’t in time, and therefore can’t get travel assistance. And I think that that’s improper and out of compliance with any travel policy written or unwritten that I’ve received. And so I…

Female: That means that you are subjected…

Wendy: So I will not be… I won’t be in San Juan unless ICANN comes to its senses and recognizes that I can still purchase travel more cheaply than anything that American Express was offering.

Annette: This is crazy. I mean, come on, what’s going on? Nick, is it true that…

Nick: Shall I step in here? Inaudible 00:55:06 the travel policy that went out, as all of you received the e-mail, said that travel had to be booked and paid for, booked and ticketed, by the 9th, and Wendy’s ticket was not booked or paid for by the 9th, and that’s really the nature of the problem. There’s no interest in excluding Wendy or anything of the sort, actually. And you’re not, Wendy. If you don’t actually buy a ticket and get it booked and bought by the 9th, then you’re not in compliance with the travel policy. We’re not acting arbitrarily or…

Wendy: You are acting arbitrarily, because if the travel agents had had their act together and been able to book a ticket in reasonable time after getting a request, or had told me that there was a previous deadline…

Nick: You were told that there was a deadline, of the 9th, it went out in the first e-mail that you received.

Wendy: Yes, and if they had told me that there was a previous… a deadline earlier than the 9th for getting information together… I’ve worked with travel agents who were able to turn around a ticket in an hour, and the fact that these couldn’t isn’t something that I…

Nick: Well, if you wait till the last moment, things do tend to happen that don’t otherwise. Everyone else managed to get ticketed in much less than the full amount of time.

Izumi: Is there any reason… I’m sorry, is there any reason Nick that you have to really fully…

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

…comply to this new policy that inaudible 00:56:33 way? I don’t understand why. Other than just imposing the rules. What’s the benefit?

Kurt: This is Kurt Pritz inaudible.

Male: Good timing.

Kurt: I was there the last half.

Izumi: I would request Nick or whoever to explain why you should stick that rigidly, for the first time applying this rule, and… other than showing precedence, is there any pragmatic reason that you cannot accept this modification by Wendy?

Nick: Um, guys, I think we should get on with the call that we have, and Wendy and I can talk about this separately. There is an enquiry into American Express about one or two points that Wendy raised, and we’ll see what the result of those enquiries is.

Jacqueline: I think Izumi…

Alan: Nick, before we go on with the new call, it’s Alan, I would strongly object if I end up being the only North American ALAC member at this meeting. If there is any possibility of having another member there.

Nick: Even if Wendy is not there in person, there will be remote participation options.

Wendy: No. No. No. No. No.

Alan: That is not the same and you know that.

Izumi: That’s not a good excuse.

Nick: It’s not an excuse. It’s just reality.

Alan: I’m giving my objection formally at this point. If there is any way to fix this problem at this point, I believe it should be fixed.

Nick: Noted.

Hong?: I absolutely agree. I think I really would like to support Izumi and Alan in that. There is a chance to get a ticket easily from the States to San Juan in time now, and we should fix it now and discuss everything else later.

Izumi: Nick, my request is to give the good reason to us. Not to settle with Wendy and you.

Nick: The reason is stated, guys. The reason is stated. I’ve stated it to Wendy. I’ve stated it to you. It was a very straight-forward and simple thing. We have a travel policy, and tearing it up on the first go-round, not because…

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

…of any fault of ICANN or anyone else, is not reasonable. Everyone had an equal chance to deal with this in the time allowed. Wendy is the only person who didn’t manage to do that.

Alan: Nick, if you had published the travel policy three months ahead of time, I might agree with you.

Nick: Well, I published it when I could, and everyone else has managed to live by it.

Several speakers: No. No. No. No. No.

Nick: It’s not that complicated.

Male: That’s not the point.

Jacqueline: Okay.

Siavash?: May I interject something? I’ve been in ALAC for 18 months, and throughout this time we’ve been promised that ALAC, that ICANN is going to come up with a reasonable and explicit travel policy. And after the 18 months that I’ve been in, all of a sudden there’s this policy. And it’s being enforced… For a long time we were told that very soon we’re going to see this policy. We didn’t see it for a long, long time. Now all of a sudden, we have this policy. And this one person, who is one of the persons with the longest stay… tenure on ALAC, is being rejected for not observing this policy. I think you should make every effort to rectify this.

Izumi: Even if Wendy made a mistake, it doesn’t mean she is automatically rejected by the newly imposed rule.

Female: Exactly.

Izumi: That’s why I’m asking why the reason is that you cannot really work together? Nick, you didn’t take my point. So please reflect and come back later.

Jacqueline: Okay, so what we have is that Nick will…

Annette: Jacqueline, I really would like to urge you, as the Chair, to make sure that all members of the ALAC can take part and participate in our meeting.

Jacqueline: So what we have is that Nick will talk to American Express and try and find a way for Wendy to get to San Juan? Is that an accurate summary of the…

Female: Sounds good to me.

Jacqueline: Good.

Doug: Hi, just to jump here. Mike, this is Doug Brandt. I’ve been on the call for about a minute now.

Jacqueline?: Hi Doug.

Doug: How are you?

Nick: So, Doug, you are the top… you and Kurt are at the top of the agenda.

Doug: Great. So, are we ready to begin?

Female: Yes.

Nick: Indeed.

Wendy: Sure, and background rules. May we assume that everything said here is public and that we may share the slides that we received with the public?

Doug: Yes, absolutely. As we get through this, I’ll tell you, I think we’re going to update a few things already. We’ve gotten some feedback. But they’re certainly… anything we discuss I think is open for discussion.

Nick: This is recorded, by the way, guys, so people would be able to listen.

Alan: And will be made public. So it better be.

Nick: You’re on the record.

Doug: That’s good to hear.

Jacqueline: Then let’s go.

Doug: Just a little brief intro from me. First, let me check that Kurt and I aren’t in the same location. Kurt, are you on the line as well?

Kurt: Yes, I sure am.

Doug: Okay, great. Good morning. First of all, let me introduce myself. I’ve been at ICANN now a little bit less than six months. I actually did get a chance to go to my first ICANN meeting in Lisbon, and sat in, sort of in the back of the room, quietly, for part of an ALAC meeting on constituency base, so I did get to at least visually meet some of you there. I’d be curious just in terms of who’s on the phone, or how many people are on the phone… You know, on this call this morning.

Nick: Do you guys want to just go round quickly and…

Doug: That’d be great for me.

Jacqueline: Okay, Jacqueline.

Doug: Yes, hi Jacqueline.

Jacqueline: Hi.

Alan: Nick, do you want to call out the five RALO names, the five regions, so we know when to speak?

Nick: Okay. North America.

Alan: Alan Greenberg.

Wendy: And Wendy Seltzer.

Nick: Europe.

Annette: Annette Muehlberg.

Veronica: Veronica Cretu.

Doug: Good morning.

Nick: Africa.

Male: Nobody.

Nick: Nobody. Latin America.

Carlos: Carlos Aguirre.

Nick: Asia Pacific.

Siavash: Siavash Shahshahani.

Izumi: Izumi Aizu from Tokyo.

Cheryl: Cheryl Langdon-Orr from Australia.

Nick: That’s it.

Doug: Ooh. It’s a very tough time in Australia, I think, to take this call. Laughter.

Cheryl: Uh, yeah well. There you go.

Doug: Well, the inaudible 01:03:31 at ICANN is that a five a.m. or midnight call is not unusual.

Um, well thank you very much. It sounds like we have maybe 8 to 10 people on the call. I’ll go through… We did send out a set of slides just very… just yesterday. But hopefully that’ll be of some value. And I would also encourage as we go through this, if something’s unclear, or if you have a question or comment let me get that… don’t hold that to the end, please. And my understanding is that we have about an hour for the call.

Female: Mm-hmm.

Doug: Nick, I would also ask you, because it’s kind of hard to talk and take notes at the same time, if you could… I understand I guess there’ll be a recording of this, but I think it’d be great if there are any particular notes or action items or follow-ups that come out of this, if you could take those?

Nick: I’m happy to do so.

Doug: Thank you, Nick. I’ll just dive in here. And, by the way, if you don’t have the slides in front of you, I don’t think it’s absolutely essential. It just gives us a way to all share some of the information visually. But I’ll talk through this as well.

So I’m on page one of the slide presentation, and I’m going to sort of, myself, give out the answer here, and discuss how we got to the answer. I don’t believe in the slow, suspenseful presentation. So this proposed budget, the first point is that it was based on the operating plan that was posted before Lisbon. And think that our job is to come up with a budget that has close coherence with the operating plan. The net revenue in the plan shows $46.6 million, which is inaudible 01:05:14 ahead of fiscal ’07. As we get very late-breaking data… I don’t know if you all are aware, I’m learning about ICANN as well, that we get quarterly information on registration transactions, and as we’re getting very late-breaking information, we’re actually considering increasing that revenue projection for next year. And what the implications of that are. So when I said we’re considering making some changes here, even late-breaking changes, it would be around the revenue line.

We do talk about revenue in this presentation, and Kurt will take that piece. And he may have some comments on it at that time. Currently we have expenses planned of about $41.5 million. By the way, modulo… or, there’s no current plan to change that part of the budget, except based on comments we get from you and others. But when I talk about potentially changing some of these numbers it would be around the revenue side.

To be clear on that $41.5 million, it’s really about $39.5 million, plus an explicit $2 million contingency.

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

I don’t know how many of you have gone through a budgeting process in any of your business endeavours, or even in some government budgets. It… the general budgeting philosophy is to try to get lean budgeting on each department level, but to still have some flexibility in the budget overall to react to changes as they occur. That contingency is held in one place. You can explicitly make a decision about whether to spend that money or not. That has been done previously in ICANN budgets, but was not done in fiscal ’07. And I think that that would be a feature that we would try to make consistent on a go ahead basis.

For the first time ever, ICANN is having a separate capital budget. We’ll go through what some of those capital items are. Again, this is a very standard process, and I think better… helps the financial numbers better reflect the reality of how money is being spent.

Hong: Sorry, as a non-Native speaker. “Capital budget”?

Doug: Yes, so. This is a bit of an accounting… It may be, I’ll try to give a quick explanation, and then I would be happy to write a quick e-mail, send it to Nick, that he could send out to the list. The notion of a capital budget is an accounting term. So that, let’s say we were going to buy… For example, in this budget we anticipate spending $650,000 on l.root equipment. That $650,000 is not used up in one year. It’s important equipment that will stay valuable over a period of time. And with a capital budget you actually don’t show as expense on the financial statements that full $650,000 in one year.

Hong: Okay.

Doug: It’s sort of an accounting technicality, but it actually helps the financial statement better reflect the utilization of equipment, and I’ll be happy to… You know, I’ll find either a hyperlink to an accounting website, or type in a paragraph myself to explain that and send it to Nick.

Is that… Is it okay if we move on for now on that item?

Female: Sure.

Doug: Okay. And that would leave a contribution to reserve of about $3.4 million in this current plan. Just in terms of the high level numbers, that’s sort of what the budget proposes. I think you’ll see as we go through this presentation that in general the expense growth of about $10 million from the previous budget is really driven by moving into implementation mode on some of the high-priority initiatives for ICANN. These initiatives aren’t new. As we go down this list, they’ll be very familiar… it’s a familiar list, but really are moving more towards an implementation of these ideas.

Wendy: Am I reading this correctly to see no escrow services on here?

Doug: I’m not sure I understand the question.

Wendy: Are escrow services budgeted for anywhere here?

Doug: Are you talking about registrar data escrow?

Wendy: Yes. And registry data escrow.

Doug: Yes. Registrar data escrow is specifically called out in this budget. And we’ll hit a page where we talk about that. And what we’re doing right now is seeking feedback. And we’ve had a couple of calls already. We’ll be posting this budget I think in six languages this week. The goal is either Thursday or Friday of this week to have the budget documents available in six languages. So we’re in the process of getting input, and we’ll be seeking approval of the budget in San Juan.

Next couple of pages I’m not going to spend a lot of time on. But just so you understand sort of the process that we went through. And, you know, I assume many of the people on the call have in some context gone through a budgeting process. And it’s iterative. You go through and do this more than once. The driver, again…

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

…was the idea of accurately reflecting the operating plan…

Siavash: Okay, I’m back in the connection.

Jacqueline: Hi Siavash.

Siavash: Sorry.

Doug: Accurately reflecting the operating plan that we posted in the budget to make sure that we have adequate resources to do it. At ICANN, when you’re looking at budgeting, the money is spent on people, travel, professional services. Those are the key drivers of expense. And we actually, at a department manager level, which is pretty broad within the organization, thought about input in terms of being able to spend the money to execute on these operating plan activities. Obviously in a 01:11:44 top-down review of the input, in some cases we’re able to find efficiencies. We find places where travel dollars are counted in multiple places and obviously we don’t want to do that. Really keep a focus to hire only… to add people, which tends to drive expense, in areas that directly benefit ICANN constituencies. I think if you look at this in a little bit more detail, you’ll see a lot of internally facing areas, for example information technology, human resources, finance. We’re not adding any head counts, and actually decreasing the budget for those areas. Absolute dollar decreases relative to fiscal ’07, while at the same time really challenging those teams to deliver a higher level of service. In general, I don’t think it matters to volunteers such as you. Not a lot of concern about what goes on in those parts, as long as we can pay the bills, and pay expense reports in a timely way. So that, in looking at hiring we really focussed on hiring in externally facing roles. And again, as I said, it’s an iterative process,

On the next page, we… just very briefly, we started with this bottom-up process, ended up with a budget total of $50 million. The key eliminations were in these first two line items. That is, first, 11 head count, for about $1.5 million, And then a number of the capital projects, that are actually valuable capital projects that we would like to be able to do, which is… For example, we have an ancient financial system that needs to be replaced. We’ll probably do that, we must do that, in fiscal year ’09. A document management system. This year we are budgeting for a shared backup system, which is absolutely essential, which doesn’t really get us to a full disaster recovery system which will have to happen in fiscal year ’09. And inaudible 01:13:46 web development activities, although there’s still quite a bit in there.

We did scale back and really also got more efficiencies in some areas. For example, the ALAC budget, I know it’s here from the original requests of Nick, about $200,000. Some of that, actually because of that was double counting with meetings and ALAC, and I think that in terms of the ALAC budget that was actually put forward, at least my understanding from Nick, is that we’re going to be able to cover all ALAC activities. I would also say that this is an opportunity, as well as in San Juan, if the ALAC group has other input, in terms of important programs that haven’t been covered in this budget, we’d love to get that input. But our understanding is right now that, in terms of travel and programs, that the budget does cover what’s anticipated.

Izumi: Can I ask a question now?

Doug: Sure.

Izumi: So this scale back means that $200K for ALAC travel is the after the scale back, or before?

Kurt: The budget you have is the actual budget right now.

Izumi: Of $200K for the ALAC travel?

Nick: No. Just so you know, guys, there is provision in travel for 35 people to attend each international ICANN meeting. That’s the main element of travel.

Jacqueline: Izumi. It’s Jacqueline. It seems the $200,000 was what was removed…

Doug: Yes.

Jacqueline: …in efficiencies by double counting and so forth. So from the original $50 million or whatever, they found $200,000 that was not necessary, and that’s just savings.

Kurt: That’s exactly right, Jacqueline.

Sebastien: It’s Sebastien. I would like to know if we can have… what it was asked for a budget for ALAC. Because we can always decrease the budget, but what was asked and what it will be used for could be interesting, and I will say much more interesting to know all the budget and if it’s a good idea to have a decrease of capital projects and so on. To have a good overview, yes, but what it’s done for ALAC. And at this point I will say that I am very surprised that it’s done with decreases for ALAC and not for other places.

Wendy: Yes, ALAC is consuming one half of one percent of this $40 million budget.

Sebastien: Yes, and if I can ask Doug to… Doug, I would like to let you know that you speak at least three foreign languages for us, for me. You speak by phone, you speak English, and you speak accountable people. Accountability. Then it’s awful. Sorry to tell you that. It’s like if we are people from IT speaking together. We need to discuss together, then we need to make some effort. If I do it in French, I am sure that you will get some trouble, but that’s one of my points, sorry.

Alan: It’s Alan here. I think the focus of what we’re talking about is the question that was originally asked. Slide three says $200,000 K in ALAC travel. We don’t know is it now 200, was it reduced by 200, was it previously 200? What we would like to see is what the ALAC budget is. And simply saying $200K here, we don’t even have a frame of reference to know, was this the reduced amount, the current amount, whatever.

Doug: Let me try to answer the question again. I think Jacqueline actually said it exactly right, if I identified her voice correctly.

Jacqueline: Yes, that was me.

Doug: I was just trying to… If you look at the title of this slide, what it says is Budget Process. And so, I was just trying to give you all a feel for the process that we went through in terms of getting to the answer, which is. After rolling up all the dollars from sort of a bottom-up, again… I’m trying to avoid English colloquialism and accounting colloquialism. But after adding up each budget request, it added up to about $50 million. And that, I think what you’d hope we would do, from ICANN staff, is go through that. Because $50 million is too big of a budget. And go through that and try to make sure that we could accurately support what’s in the operating plan, identify efficiencies, and delay some projects if need be, to come up with a budget that covers the operating plan and is doable.

So, just talking about the process. The actual budget number for ALAC we believe, as Nick says, covers the travel requirements for ALAC and covers the important projects for ALAC. So this is saying, where, from our $50 million starting point, where we made reductions.

Izumi: May I then ask you a question?

Doug: Yes, please.

Izumi: It says in this page three that you reduced inaudible 01:19:40 10 million, right?

Doug: Yes.

Izumi: And then, in the breakdown, the first item is 1.5, the next one is 2. Total of 2.5, which is only a quarter of. There is no explanation about the three quarters of the reduction. Where are they? I would suggest you to write this, instead of lowering the addition to the 100K or 200K reduction in the next bullet. We don’t know what are the major reductions, and you pick up only the minor ones. That was the impression I have, and so that I fear there’s some intention behind which is not healthy.

Doug: I’m sorry it’s viewed that way, because there certainly is no intention, other than to try to give people a flavour for the budget process we went through. I guess we could avoid talking about process at all and just talk about what the numbers are. Again, there certainly is no intention there.

Nick: These are just examples, these are meant to show examples of what the total amount was.

Izumi: Then please say these are the examples in the summary, otherwise…

Wendy: In other words, these are to pacify those interests who would like to see the public interest diminish in ICANN.

Jacqueline: I would say… This is Jacqueline again. I think that it’s basically, since we’ve always said that we’re not… we haven’t got enough information on how the process works and so on, that this is kind of, “Okay, this is the process, and this is what we go through. And for example, this is what we did when we got the $50 million budget. We went through, and we did this, and we took out some here, and we took out some there, and then we came up with the final budget.” Which I guess they will tell us in a few minutes…

Kurt?: Yes.

Jacqueline: … the actual numbers of what we have.

Izumi: Apart from this, naturally you usually show the examples of the major ones, not the minor ones. And I’m asking what are the major factors contributed to reduce the budget?

Doug: Right. And I’ll just say, as the guy who wrote this slide, and perhaps not nearly sensitive enough to all the different forces of interest within ICANN, there is no intention behind this line, other than just to give people an idea of the process.

Izumi: So please give the idea of the majority… major factors, which is much more…

Doug: And I think that’s a reasonable question. It turns out that, when making these kind of cuts, and at the level of detail we did it, it was not cutting out massive amounts of money on one line item, but rather going through with a pretty fine toothed comb, and through details, and trying to get to a budget that was not the whole counting things 01:22:18, was reasonably optimized toward the operating plan, and so, for example…

Izumi: Okay, then to save time, then add one line and explain that, that would help a lot.

Doug: I think that’s a great comment. We should do that.

Nick: I’ll note that.

Annette: That means there are no major cuts than just the 200K or something like that?

Doug: Again…

Annette: It’s all around that. That’s what Izumi is asking for, right?

Doug: Yes, and again, you know, clearly this slide did not communicate what it was intended to do. When you talk about cuts of budgets, certainly the real… again, this is just trying to give a flavour of budget process, and I think that anyone who’s gone through a budgeting process before, this should be pretty familiar in terms of, you start out with a number, and with still an attempt to deliver on the objectives of the organization. Looking for where there are efficiencies, double counting, things that can be delayed. That’s the process we went through. What really is most important is that we can fund the projects that are in the operating plan, and I think with Nick for ALAC, and with all aspects of the operating plan, we believe that the operating plan as posted now is supported by the budget.

Alan: Can I suggest we keep on going, or we’ll run out of time?

Doug: Yes, let’s… thank you. So I’m on slide four, and this would be an important one for us to spend a little time on. Does anyone… Does anyone not have access to these slides? Because if so, I’m happy to read it out. But I’m assuming right now that everyone does have access to the slides.

Nick: I sent them out this morning. Or, actually, I think, last night.

Female: Last night.

Nick: Whenever you sent them.

Doug: Okay, so unless someone speaks up, I’m going to assume that you all have access to these slides. Obviously, again, if we do the math, these key initiatives add up to almost $7 million, and the budget increase is about $10 million, so this is not attempting to be a full accounting for every dollar difference in the budget this year, but trying to give you a flavour for where this incremental spending is going. And…

voice interrupts from another call

Excuse me? Hello? Um, so these, if you look at these initiatives, these initiatives should all look pretty familiar, I think, to you all. And that, especially in the areas of the generic TLD process, really starting out in a major way. With an eye towards, at the end of this fiscal year, being able to take gTLD applications. IDN is a major focus. IANA. Compliance is… We have had a person responsible for compliance at ICANN since, I think November of last year, although I’m not certain about the exact date. In this fiscal year we’re really going to fund that effort. I don’t know who it was who made the point about data escrow, but…

Nick: It was Wendy.

Doug: Oh, okay, thank you. This slide does specifically call out registrar data escrow, as a funded, active effort. You can just sort of look down this list and see where some of the big dollars are being spent.

Wendy: What is the economist market analysis? This is Wendy again.

Nick: There’s a… I think a lot of… certainly a big appetite from the Board has been that as… there’s discussion going on about tasting, kiting, various registry services, that we get better informed about what the market impact of these decisions are. Because it’s very clear that the players… the corporate players who get involved in these things are sort of…

Wendy: Sorry, I should have phrased my question more clearly. I’m very interested in seeing market analyses by economists. Is that with an aim toward making data available to the public?

Doug: You know, my assumption would be, I can’t say certainly that every single thing that economist did would be public. But my assumption would be that it would be market studies that in general would be made public and would be posted as part of ICANN information. Kurt, I don’t know if you have any additional insight on that?

Kurt: No. I think it’s intended to inform the policy debate about either domain tasting or various issues that… the deleted names market. You know, if we… if ICANN or inaudible 01:27:18 were to take actions on those issues, we’d want to know what the effects on the whole market are, and so it’s meant to actually inform the bottom-up policy development debate.

Alan: Could I ask what the legal major initiative support is? An incremental value of $700K.

Doug: Yes. So, the legal budget at ICANN is substantial, and part of that is that we’re in litigation from time to time, which is very expensive. This notion is that in addition… I’ll give you a short answer and maybe a little bit of a longer answer. That this legal expense is directly related to support of the establishment of some of these key initiatives. For example, the generic TLD start-up process has some significant legal expense associated with it. The IDN process has some fairly significant legal support built into it. So in terms of pulling out from legal, because legal just shows up sort of as a line item, pulling out from legal that portion related to the start-up of these initiatives. Does that answer your question?

Alan: Uh, to the extent that, yes it does, okay.

Male: I have a question.

Doug: Yes please.

Male: And a comment on the outreach, fellowship and ALAC. Is the definition of outreach here same or different from the page 21 of the more detailed budget report which includes region based ICANN staff, or Ombudsman, or media transparence 01:28:58? The fellowship is only one percent of the outreach.

Doug: Right.

Male: So it is a confusing use of the terms of ‘gaining outreach.’

Doug: Yes. I think that’s a good point, that it’s clearly not, this is just a subset of those activities that were identified as outreach.

Male: Then why do you combine the fellowship and the ALAC as an outreach? To me, the outreach may mean to the other activities other than ALAC. The context behind that is, we are very sensitive to the use of the budget for ALAC. And sometimes, we are totally blamed that you’re spending too much money. So then we need to really clarify what our own domain of ALAC budget, and what are not in our domain.

Doug: You know, I…

Male: I really would like to have further clarification on this inaudible ALAC.

Doug: What would that clarification be?

Nick: Yes, I can’t capture that.

Male: Well, why do you combine the inaudible 01:30:02 per se, and why you, it’s just an example, perhaps, but inaudible and ALAC representing outreach, but not other elements of outreach.

Alan: Well, specifically on page 12 you have outreach, but it’s not clear where ALAC fits in the detailed pie chart.

Male: And also if you read the page 21 again of the proposed budget, not the… I mean, not the slides but more detailed ones. The definition about which is very different.

Izumi?: And the amount of money is totally different, too.

Nick: So, is the question what is meant by the phrase on this slide, “Outreach, ALAC and Fellowship”? Is that…

Male: And also the clarification between this outreach and that outreach.

Alan: But certainly a question is, but what comprises this million dollars?

Doug: Right, so, I think that if we take a step back, again I assume that most of you have been involved in some kind of budgeting process before. I think one of the things we’re trying to do at ICANN, one of my goals at ICANN is to make the information more accessible to non-accounting people. That means by… by summarizing, you always are going to lose some information. I think that if what you’re saying is, “What exactly is the ALAC budget?” we can certainly answer that question. I don’t know if you have that number at your fingertips, Nick.

Nick: Um. I think I do.

Doug: My recollection is it’s about $850,000.

Nick: Mm-hmm.

Doug: Okay. So we can… We’ll certainly follow up with…

Izumi: Inaudible 01:31:52 we can see that?

Doug: Excuse me?

Izumi: Is there any breakdown we can see that out of $850,000?

Doug: I mean, again, I will be happy to follow up to the list through Nick with the specific ALAC budget.

Jacqueline: Izumi, I just sent back out the one that Nick sent on the 30th of March, that was supposed to be our budget breakdown.

Doug: Yes.

Izumi: Yes, but it was a proposed one, and, you know, the latest one.

Jacqueline: It’s still 01:32:22 proposed. Oh.

Doug: Jacqueline, what was the total number on that budget?

Jacqueline: $839,139.

Doug: That is the most current number, then. As I said, my recollection was about $850,000. So $840,000. And that is what’s built into this proposed budget. That is the most current number.

Izumi: So it’s after the reduction.

Doug: Yes.

Wendy: Let me just say that I hardly think our teleconferences have been $12,000 worth of value.

Doug: I’ve got to tell you that there are a couple of areas at ICANN that I’m looking at. These teleconferences are unbelievably expensive to run. And actually as of yesterday, and it’ll take a little time, I think it’ll take a few months to work this out. But we are bringing somebody in to look at all of our communications expenses, because, you know, if we really added those up across the organization, it’s a very significant expense. It’s sort of an important lifeblood of the organization, and it’s something that we’re looking at right now.

Cheryl: Can I just butt in? It’s Cheryl from Australia here. This is my fifth teleconference for today, and I don’t know about the value for money aspect of it, I could certainly get it because I’m on the finance committee of every one of the organizations inaudible 01:33:55 the other four. But there’s an enormous variety in both cost effectiveness and ease of use. So I think that a full review would be well worthwhile. Particularly with this system.

Doug: Right. I couldn’t agree with you more. There’s just a lot of work to do, and it’s when you tee it up. So that… we actually began on that just yesterday.

Cheryl: Uh-huh.

Doug: So, again, just to be sort of … the earlier conversation. You know, the budget number for ALAC is that budget number, that $840,000 that was put forth, that Jacqueline had discussed previously.

Izumi?: It is not shown in this presentation.

Doug: Right, and in general I think, you know, the purpose of this presentation was really to try to give the community, and I’ve used this exact same presentation with multiple groups, just a feeling of where the money is being spent. I think the challenge is, for example, if you look at the operating plan, the posted operating plan, ICANN really, I think if you look at that it’s hard to imagine a more sort of complete, detailed, open view of what the operating plan is. It’s 27 pages. So it takes a commitment to go through that and really understand what’s in that operating plan. With the budget, what we’ve tried to do is provide some high-level information to give people… This is not intended to be a presentation that is your working budget, but rather attempting to give a sense of where the money is being spent. Needless to say, that summarizes information and perhaps not in the way that’s best working here for you all. But the purpose is to give a sense of where the money is being spent, as opposed to a financial accounting of all the numbers.

But the budget is $840,000 for ALAC. And the… which by the way…

Alan: Doug, can I interrupt? It’s Alan Greenberg. I think you’re hearing a lot of frustration because we don’t know what the numbers are. I’d like to go through the rest of your presentation on process, but I think we need to follow up with real numbers. The $800,000 that Jacqueline sent around is in fact not an annual budget but is January to July. There’s so much obfuscation here that we just have more questions than we can ever answer in a conference call because of the lack of transparency and lack of information about our own budget.

Nick: Can I just say that points 2 and 3 of the agenda are meant to deal with those particular issues.

Alan: But given we only have 20 minutes left, we’re not likely to get to them.

Wendy: Thank God.

Doug: I would be happy to… we don’t have to go through every one of these slides. Because I think it’s very important, when I hear “obfuscation” and “lack of transparency,” I think that’s probably a lot more important to deal with than getting through the rest of these slides. Because, really, what these slides are about is not ALAC, these are about… it’s more an attempt to have a conversation with you about the entirety of the ICANN budget. And it seems like there’s a bigger issue to make sure that we’re on track with what specifically the ALAC budget is. So I’m… you know I, believe me, I have no… feel no need to go through these in detail, and would be happy to maybe just answer any additional questions. So I’ll look to you, Jacqueline, to sort of guide the call. I’d be happy to take it where you’d like to go.

Jacqueline: Okay, well, there was one thing that I personally had a question about, which was the revenue.

Doug: Yes.

Jacqueline: And what’s revenue? I mean, basically ICANN gets almost all its money from the inaudible 01:38:01.

Nick: This is page six you’re talking about, right Jacqueline? Just so, if people are looking, they can see what you…

Jacqueline: Wait, inaudible what page it is.

Nick: I think it’s page six. Revenue sources?

Jacqueline: Right. I mean, given that we’re getting 55 percent from the TLD registrars and 38 percent from the registries, it’s always a concern that, basically, if you’re getting the money almost only from one source, then you have a lot of pressure to do what that source says. And that… is there any plan or process to say that… get funding from other sources? Or how do we make sure that the registrars and registries don’t take over overtalking 01:38:58 and privatize the ICANN business.

Annette: And may I add to Jacqueline’s question? It would be helpful to see a split off of the registrars and registries. If there is a big one or not.

Alan: It is there on the…

Nick: It is split, there on the page, page six.

Doug: Since we’re talking about…

Annette: No, no, no, no. I am looking at page six.

Jacqueline: Oh, you mean like if there’s a particular registrar or registry…

Annette: Exactly.

Nick?: Oh, right, I see.

Jacqueline: …that’s giving a big chunk of the 38 percent or the 55 percent. If there’s any, like, not inaudible 01:39:32 but if for example overtalking giving us 10 million of the 25 million.

Doug: Mm-hmm.

Kurt: Yes, this is Kurt. Yeah, we share your concerns because it’s good business to have your revenue from many different sources rather than a few sources, so over the past years we have worked towards diversifying our sources of revenue in order to, you know, provide less rift on several points, just on a pure business point, we wanted just to… more guarantee a steady state of revenue or have a level of revenue that lasts inaudible word 1:40:15 at last reconcile 1:40:18. That’s what we’ve been working toward. The degree of success we’ve had over the past year is that the fees contributed by gTLD registrars has… the percentage anyway, the amount has increased but the percentage has dropped dramatically from, I think like 80% down to the present mid-50’s range, and so where registrars formerly contributed all our revenue, now they contribute less. So, what’s going up to take the place of that, most significantly as you can see the gTLD registry revenue has increased the most and that was accomplished by re-negotiating registry contracts with, as you mentioned, .com .net .org and unknown word 1:41:06 .biz. Those are the main ones, I’m leaving one out. And also negotiating agreements with… overtalking 1:41:14

Female: inaudible overtalking 1:41:15 …travel and dot arrow that contribute so much to the bottom line.

Kurt: But mobi actually does contribute some and that is one of the new ones. So, then, we’re more balanced there, but we really need to be more balanced. We had been working toward increased contributions from ccTLDs either through the CCNSO or as individual ccTLDs, and you see we’re forecasting a 20% increase over last year, but still that slice of the pie is somewhat small. The good news is we think we’ve created a sound base for further increases in ccTLD sourced revenue.

Female: inaudible comment 1:42:04

Kurt: Yeah, it was timed a similar frameworks of accountability with many cc’s so that I think over 60% of the ccTLD registrants worldwide are members of TLDs or registrants in TLDs that have a contract with ICANN. So we’re 60% of the registrants worldwide. And also the CCNSO has developed and passed a model for providing funding to ICANN where its sort of a banded model – if you’re in a band of registrations then you should contribute this much. The inaudible word 1:42:40 senders is that, you know, those bands call for fairly low contributions to ICANN so while we’ve increased the amount of revenue expected from ccTLDs every year, it still adds a fairly small percentage, that $1.inaudible million you see there.

Female: So a different way to balance this chart, would be to reduce the amount of revenue from the TLD registries and registrars and to put ICANN on a bit of an austerity budget. Doing a bit of “Googling”, pulled off the historical footnote of a Kurin McCarthy article from 2003, marvelling at ICANN’s $6 million budget, and that’s only three years ago. And it’s astonishing that the organization has grown as much as it has, and I…

Kurt: And not meaning to be glib, one of the side benefits is sending 35 people to, you know, ALAC and ICANN meetings. The fact that we’ve been able to assign resources… attract resources by being a vibrant organization and then having someone like Nick or name 1:43:51 who’s been very effective and finally, there’s more than a coincidence I think between ICANN’s financial health and the ability to finally, you know, form the RALOs and get that very significant accomplishment over the top. It’s also…

Female: I don’t think we want to get into that debate here.

Kurt: Okay. It’s also going to fund the market-based studies that we want to undertake to fully understand the market – we wouldn’t be able to fund them. Data escrow which is written… Registrar Data Escrow, which is written into the agreements that ICANN is obligated to fund, you know, we couldn’t even begin to dream to fund at old revenue levels and the new revenue levels enable us to fund that. We’ve established regional liaisons across the world in a very economic fashion. They all work out of their houses or apartments, so we didn’t go to the expense of establishing offices worldwide, but we essentially have representatives in five regions in the world. So, we would have never been able to do that before, and I could… I could “wax poetic” and go on about all the things we’re able to do now as I go up and down the hall at ICANN, surely part of our mission that we couldn’t do before. There’s a million dollar… cut off overtalking 1:45:13

Female: inaudible overtalking …pressure to grow the mission in response to all of the added size and revenue.

Kurt: Yeah, so we’re very careful not to do that and that’s one of the reasons why we post the Operating Plan and solicit comments; You know, inside ICANN we beat each other up a bit and talk about what we’re going to try to do for the upcoming year, and we think it’s too ambitious, but one thing we do is tie every objective in the operating plan to one of our core values in one of the four mission statements that’s in the original white paper. So, we aspire not to stray from that core mission, that now technical coordination mission.

Alan: If I can change the subject slightly, I’d like to go back to ALAC budget issues and At-Large budget issues.

Female: Yes, please.

Alan: And, on a very specific one, however, that you say we can make these charts and this presentation available, they’re still marked “ICANN Confidential”.

Male: It should either be removed or saying, “ICANN Confidential Until Release”. I really hate redistributing documents which says “Confidential” on them.

Male: I totally agree with you, and something is odd, because the version I have – I’m looking at right now – does not have ICANN Confidential marked on it.

Male: The ones we have, does on the chart – for instance your page 6.

Male: It would have been removed from the… point well made and I’ll provide Nick with a new version. You see, it was… that was a leftover because the way the charts were created.

Female: inaudible comment due to overtalking 1:46:49

Male: Nick, CLS lost connection, Alice was never called. Could you fix please? It’s on the list.

Nick: Okay, does Sebastien need to be rang back?

Male: Siavash and Alice never been called at all.

Male: Alice has never been called.

Nick: Okay.

Female: And for that we’re paying a thousand dollars a month.

Male: I’m just sort of watching the clock to a certain extent here, and it’s a… I think we have 10 minutes left and again maybe I’ll ask you Jacqueline, in terms of using the rest of this time, what would be the best use of the time now, or again we could…

phone beeps indicating someone has joined

Male: …schedule more time together if that’s what the group would like.

Jacqueline: Okay, I think the best thing would be to get through the ALAC budget and say, “Okay, this is what we’ve got and what…” because I’m looking for the… I think that the one I found is a 2007 one, and so I’m looking for it because I know Nick sent it and I haven’t found it yet.

Nick: May I? I probably should give some background here so that it’s… because I had an email conservation with the three ALAC members on the budget committee. There’s not a desire to be opaque with transmitting budget information and I’m sure it appears that that’s the objective, but it’s not. The problem that we face here is that the more ALAC… the more At-Large sticks out, the more it gets shot at because not all constituencies in ICANN actually like the amount that ICANN spends on At-Large. I mean, just being entirely candid. So, what we’re trying to do is actually support At-Large in a way that doesn’t get it shot at. So, I’m sure we can come up with a way that is more… an amount of information that is more satisfactory to the committee about the budget and the amounts that make it up. But, I’m just… I just want everyone to understand that what we need to do is balance it out so that we don’t become a target.

Alan: Nick, I think the point you raise is important, however, it may well be that the ALAC committee itself is one of those groups that thinks you’re not spending money wisely. And, if so, that’s important information for ICANN. If, for instance, we think you are spending twice as much or only half as much as you should be spending on a specific aspect, whether its RALO support or bringing people to meetings, I think that’s important information and right now we do not have that information. If you want to make it available only to the committee members and not for redistribution, that’s better than nothing.

Nick: Well this is what I was going to turn to next and say to you, is what we want… what we would like to come up with is a mechanism that gives you the information that you want to have about the budget, obscures information about people’s salaries and the like – which have to be kept confidential in any case – and perhaps even maybe equally important, certainly more, provides a real way for the regions and for the committee itself to propose projects that get included in the budget. I mean, as I inaudible overtalking 1:50:25 I’ve been saying that all along, that we really want… that’s what we really want. I don’t want to propose, you know, things for the budget – projects for the budget. I would much rather you say, “Well let’s do this”, and I help come up with the cost of it and then that becomes the budget. I would be much more interested in that, and I think you would be.

Alan: Nick, Nick… I can’t speak for other people, but I’ve managed budgets myself that are roughly half the size or a little bit more the size of ICANN’s budget. I would like to be treated as an adult and given information so that I can make evaluation judgments of my own and help ICANN manage this whole process.

Male: I can’t speak for other people, but certainly from my perspective, I don’t feel I’m getting that information right now.

Male: I cannot agree more.

Female: inaudible 1:51:19

Female: name 1:51:20 could you give us that information?

Male: I’m sorry?

Nick: Why don’t I… why don’t I…

Female: We’re talking about we don’t have information, but you’re here so you can just tell us.

Male: Right. So, I guess… what I said before is I thought that… I specifically answered the question about what the ALAC budget is. As I said $850,000 or $840,000, we will respond with that exact number. I think that it’s… I need to work with the ICANN team there, work with Nick, to make sure that you guys are getting the information you need in a format that as Nick said still, the way we do this we can’t be broadcasting staff salaries and that kind of thing from confidentiality then in terms of some of the key inputs into the ALAC budget…cut off due to overtalking 1:52:15

Male: Even that, you cannot broadcast the each and every staff salary, but you can still do that for every inaudible word 1:52:24 right?

Male: And we do, yes.

Alan: Well in our case…

Male: Shouldn’t we… shouldn’t we... could you also provide the information about expenditures over the previous year or years, which were never provided, so these are… on the paper or on the budget, but we didn’t know how much we actually spent.

Jacqueline: That is the one that I sent out. The one that I just found is the one that Nick sent in May, which comes up to… non-discretionary spending comes out to… no, discretionary spending comes out $493,450.

Alan: What period of time Jacqueline?

Jacqueline: That is the July 2007 to June 2008 Public Version, which I have…

Alan: When was that sent?

Nick: That was sent to the Budget Committee in May…

Alan: Ah…

Nick: With… with… overtalking 1:53:17

Annette: And I asked you to send it to whole committee.

Nick: Yes, but I had said in the email – Annette, when I responded to you – here is the rationale behind some of the resistance to giving total transparent complete everything information. We need to talk about how to meet the committee’s interests… how to meet the committee’s need for information, with the need not to get it shot at. And, inadvertently, to produce the opposite results than what you intend. Which would be getting less money because you’d get shot at.

Female: And you’ve already heard from several of us that we would prefer to see the numbers and to have that conversation in the open, even with the risk of being shot at.

Female: I would also…

Female: Something I’d like you to send again.

Alan: And another view, Wendy, is I would prefer to have it closed within the Committee only, with no… with the requirements for no redistribution than not have it at all.

Male: So here would be my input, and I know I’m new… I’m sort of new to understand what ALAC issues are. I had come to this meeting this morning with just a different background which was to… more with this idea than with some other constituency, to inform the constituency about the totality of the budget, as opposed to going specifically on the ALAC budget. I think what would be good is if I could do a little work with Nick ahead of time and when we get to San Juan, I’d love to, with Nick, come to one of your meetings and we’ll talk about these issues and see if we can get information in a way that will be helpful.

Alan: As long as this really follows through this time. We have had such meetings before.

Male: Okay, well, I mean I guess could offer not to have a meeting, but what I’m trying to do… what I’m trying to do is offer to participate and if that would be helpful I would love to do it and if not, I don’t want to inaudible 3 words 1:55:15.

Male: And in the meantime…

Male: I move that Committee accept the offer.

Male: Great, thank you.

Nick: And I… what I will do is, in the meantime, is send you what I sent the three members of the ALAC budget committee.

Female: Well I just did that.

Nick: And ask you all that, if for the present, you keep that amongst yourselves.

Male: Well I just receive and inaudible word 1:55:36 about it is a projection and estimate, not the real expenditures.

Female: No, that’s…

Nick: Yeah, but it’s not meant to. That’s the budget for next year – for this coming year.

Female: That’s the July 2007 to June 2008 one. That’s the draft budget.

Nick: What you have all received is the one that was made public, was the year to date actuals and the budget amount remaining for this year.

Alan: Those documents seem to say they were just January to June 2007, not year to date.

Nick: They included “year to date spending amounts”.

Alan: That was not clear from the titles.

Female: Oh no, there’s a year to date in that one.

Nick: In the total line, you should find the year to date amount. So, what we… Doug and I will and Kurt as needed, will get together and we will make some time on the Thursday, I’m guessing, to speak of this?

Female: On the Thursday at the ICANN meeting? Or the Thursday at the ALAC meeting. ICANN ALAC meeting? Yes, I think it really would be helpful to have a follow-up of the meeting in San Juan which we all audio cuts out 5 secs.

Male: Anyone there?

Female: Hello?

Male: Sorry, everything just cut off for a sec.

Female: We seem to have people dropping off the phone.

Female: inaudible 1:57:15 last digest, it’s a wonder anyone’s still here.

Female: What time is it please?

Vittorio: By the way, it’s Vittorio here. I actually just joined about 15 minutes ago. I actually thought the call was in 30 minutes from now at 5:30 or something. But maybe it was 3:30…

phone beeps to indicate someone has joined

Female: Well, I apologize I’m going to have to leave, but thank you Doug and Kurt for joining us.

Male: Yes, and look forward to meeting you all in person in San Juan, for those who will be there.

Female: I look forward to meeting you in San Juan too. I hope that you be able to help me arrange my travel there.

Male: Okay, well, so Nick, obviously we’ll need to follow-up, but I’m going to drop off the call as well unless anyone else has any other comments or questions at this time. Thank you all very much.

phone beeps

Female: Thank you very much.

Male: Okay, bye-bye.

Alan: Nick, are you still there?

Nick: Yes.

Male: The bud-… the only budget that I think I have received is one that…

Female: I’m back.

Alan: …is very clearly labelled January to June. It includes Lisbon and San Juan, but not San Paulo, so if you had sent out a year-to-date one, I don’t seem to have it.

Nick: That is the year-to-date one. What I will do is…

Male: What is… what is the fiscal year, from when to when?

Female: July to June.

Nick: July to June.

Male: Therefore that one should have the San Paulo meeting in it?

Female: Okay, what it has is the ICANN media budget reach forecast. That’s what it was. And at the end of it on page 2, there is a projected year end, and then there’s a year to date expenditure of $259,196.

Alan: Is that the one you resent this morning?

Female: Yes. The last line, on page 2, total estimated departmental forecast inaudible word 1:59:10. There’s a projected year end in the third column, and then the fourth is year-to-date expenditure.

Alan: Okay, but the detailed ones are… but that’s the only one we have year-to-date then? All the other numbers seem to be…

Female: All the other numbers seem to be the re-forecast for January to June and what… overtalking 1:59:33

Alan: Right. All we have is a title… is a single number for a year-to-date, or for the entire year.

Nick: In case it’s helpful for you to know, this is actually the number I also have. I don’t have, at the moment, additional information on the year-to-date, but I will work with Doug to get that for you for the meeting… cut off due to overtalking 1:59:53

Alan: Then let’s ignore the year that’s ending this month, and focus on next year. At this point I’m happy to do that.

Nick: Okay.

Izumi: I have a slightly different idea. I still want to have the record expenditures as much as possible. I don’t want to bother too much, but at least last three years, so that we… either we see the increase or the decrease and the reasons why, and why the Ombudsman for example, made a 25% increase for the next year’s budget.

Alan: Izumi, I suspect that the categories have changed inaudible word 2:00:27 that it’s probably close to impossible.

Nick: And I probably could say too much on this, but I will refer you to Doug’s previous comment about an ancient financial system that needs replacement.

Annette: Is Kurt still on?

Female: No, they’ve left.

Annette: They all left. Oh, I got disconnected when I just wanted to talk to the two of them. So, they both left?

Sp: Yes.

Annette: Okay, too bad.

Cheryl: But we will be having an opportunity to talk again.

Nick: And preparatory to that, I’ll work with him to get some further information on this topic. But you will now have a budget for next year, which is the At-Large component of the whole budget.

Female: The discretionary item.

Nick: The discretionary part, yes.

Annette: So, and within this budget we can make proposals, how to spend this budget?

Nick: Not only that, you can propose additional things.

Annette: And additional things. Because, I mean, now we missed the real budget playing cards and so we can use part of that and make proposals for this and additional proposals?

Male: Yes.

Annette: Is this confidential, or can be public?

Nick: This, please keep confidential for the time being.

Cheryl: I mean, much of what the Committee has asked for, as you well know, that as the new kid in camp and on the financial committee I’ve asked for… and I know you’ve been trying to get… so I think the committee as a whole should be aware that it’s not for the lack of you trying to get some of this stuff, because since certainly I’ve been on the financial committee, I’ve been pleased. Historical stuff info – pretty please, pretty please.

Nick: I can tell you honestly that it’s really not for want of giving any information.

Cheryl: I was trying to make that point…

phone beeps

Female: …that, yeah…overtalking

Male: inaudible overtalking 2:02:28 …much after.

Nick: Oh, I’m going to have some fun I can see… conference people. Yet another fun group.

Cheryl: Even to brief the finance committee within the ALAC has not been able to grab this information, the historical stuff, which is…

Nick: Yeah, I’m…

Cheryl: …nothing short of amazing.

Nick: And the historical stuff… just so you know – in case it’s helpful – I received for the first time this last month a year-to-date budget versus actual, but it’s so summarized I don’t know what it means. It has three lines in it, and I’m glad to have it, to be honest with you, I’m glad to have it, because it’s the first time… honestly, it’s the first time I’ve actually seen a real “this is what was budgeted and this is where you are spending”. It’s the first time ever. So, you know, I’m not saying that that’s great or anything. I’m just saying that that’s what there is.

Female: inaudible comment 2:03:47

Nick: He is trying… he is making a difference. Like I said, it’s the first time I’ve ever got that number. So, you know, it’s not going to be an ideal granular reporting for a while, because I think the financial system is not really up to delivering that.

Male: Yeah, that’s why we’ve been receiving criticism if we are spending too much, without being able to afford clear figures.

Nick: Well, it’s not that. I mean there are constituencies – not to put too fine a point on it – who don’t want to spend a bent farthing, to use an English colloquialism, on At-Large.

Male: inaudible comment 2:04:19

Nick: I mean, they really… there are constituencies, and they’re pretty powerful, who would be very happy if the spending was close to zero. And so, part of the reason why you see the figures abstracted is because we, the staff, are trying to protect At-Large’s spending levels.

Alan: Then, at the very least, we need an in-camera meeting to discuss these kind of things.

Nick: Yes, well and I think now… now that the Finance Department has been reorganized, there is about to be a new CFO, permanent CFO, appointed. Well he’s been appointed, it’s about to be announced. And, now that Doug is here I can tell you it’s made a big difference, and I think that it will now become increasingly possible to have a much different and much less frankly adversarial and frustrating relationship related to the budget than was previously possible. And I can tell you even from my perspective, I had been flying blind. laughs Not knowing what you’re spending. And so, you know, we’re all the winners here and I just hope people will, “We’ll give the new guy a chance because he really is making a difference”.

Alan: On a purely internal matter, there’s been several references to the ALAC Finance Committee. Could I ask who’s on it?

Cheryl: I am, Cheryl, and Jacqueline.

Alan: When was this committee formed?

Annette: Last year, it was the first thing we did in name 2:05:52.

Jacqueline: It was formed in name, but this one was done in… I think it was the first teleconference after Lisbon.

Female: Right.

Alan: Okay, I must have missed that one then.

Jacqueline: That was when, because there were so many new people had come in, and old people had gone, we had some spaces and holes and we asked for nominations and voted in that teleconference.

Alan: Okay, I must have not been around.

Female: I think you were travelling.

Male: I… not uncommon.

Annette: Alan, if you still want to join, you’re welcome to join.

Cheryl: Come on down Alan. laughter

Sebastien: I would like to make one suggestion, Sebastien about the spending money from At-Large. We, it seems that each meeting the goal is to have one or two RALO coming and the ALAC member coming, that’s by ICANN. I would like to suggest that we study the possibility to have during one meeting per year, or one meeting each one-and-a-half year, all the RALO coming together at the same place. I think it could be a very good improvement to share and to know each other and let the RALO know each other.

Nick: I’d love to propose that guys. To be honest with you, I’d love to. Or, rather, I’d love to support you proposing it.

Female: Like a real General Assembly?

Nick: Yeah, I would love it.

Alan: Are you saying in addition to coming when people are in the region, or instead of?

Nick: I would like to see…

Alan: No, I was asking the original proposer.

Sebastien: It’s Sebastien. In addition, I think let’s imagine that as it will be in Los Angeles next time, that we have every RALO, one people from each ALSes coming to the Los Angeles meeting. And it will not prevent people coming this time from North America and South America and the next meeting it will be in Africa. I don’t know the RALO of Africa will meet and the next one, and so on. But to have one meeting each year or year-and-a-half – we have to discuss that – all the RALO coming together.

Male: All the RALOs or all the ALSes?

Female: All the ALSes.

Sebastien: All the ALSes of all the RALOs.

Female: That would be, at the moment, ninety something people.

Cheryl: And who knows at what point that would level off.

Annette: Sebastien, I would like to propose that we discuss this really at a budget session in San Juan.

Female: San Juan, yeah.

Annette: Because this is really a big planning because travel costs are really high and we really should focus on different projects we want to make and how to spend travel… and having General Assemblies or Assemblies of RALOs in a really efficient working way. So, I think that really needs a lot of planning.

Alan: I would think it not only needs planning, I think it needs some thought. This would double the travel cost and quite significantly. And more important, it’s not clear that there would be anything other than a half hour or one hour meeting one day in the whole week where these people get in the same room and there’d be so many of them that they wouldn’t have a chance to talk to each other. So, I think we have to look at what would the real value of such a global gathering be, and have to look at it honestly.

Nick: And, I second Alan’s comment, that we could sell… I think it could be sold if it were well supported and had clear outcomes as part of it, and all of that, and especially to the extent that the RALO meetings and the RALOs do provide that there’s an increase in the amount of policy positions being taken. I think that would be also helpful to support it.

Alan: But it would have to be more than chance meetings between two people over coffee. laughs

Nick: Yeah, it has to be well organized and well thought out and all that. But… I love it.

Cheryl: Can that item go on to the Agenda, because I think it’s a really important thing to explore and from our conversations within the AP RALO at the risk of actually getting back to our reconvened meeting, is that we are looking at getting local meetings together and certainly an opportunity to have the Secretariat and Executive of the AP RALO being able to interface with other RALOs would be a very valuable thing to explore. Now, that’s very different than getting a person from every ALS, but I think there’s levels of what we might want to explore and the cost effectiveness and outcomes that could be driven from each option.

Alan: I think that’s probably a more worthwhile endeavour as a first step.

Nick: And one thing I would say to you all, is there is budgeted at present, 35 people per ICANN meeting next year and at the present moment, there isn’t really a RALO that is meeting in Los Angeles, so if we wanted to take those 20 people and use it (a) for something entirely different than travel support or (b) say, “Okay, let’s have five people from each region.” cuts out 2 secs If those things could be done.

Cheryl: …conversation to have.

Female: So, how about let you find some time to put that for our discussion in San Paulo as a separate… San Juan, as a separate item – that is something along the lines of “discussing regional cooperation and working together” and that sort of thing.

Nick: Yes.

Female: I don’t know any inaudible 2:12:19…. squeeze it in, but you have to squeeze it in.

Cheryl: Hey, what’s wrong with 2:30 in the morning? Come on guys.

Nick: You know, they host their parties every bloody night at this time.

Female: I had already suggested…

Nick: Everybody’s going to be hung over to death.

Female: I had already suggested to make them set some six o’clock breakfast meeting. laughs

Nick: No, no. Are you kidding me? I have staff meetings at 7:30 already. laughs I already have 7:30 meetings.

Jacqueline: So, if we could get back to the previous meeting before we were… the budget meeting…

Cheryl: The meeting we had is not the meeting we had.

Female: We had reached to the CCNSO report and Siavash had emailed name which basically…

Female: Siavash is still on…? inaudible 2:13:08 cuts out 2 secs

Female: Well, just because he…

phone beeps indicating someone has joined

Female: What we’ve done…

Male: We’ve been waiting for the call.

Female: Yulak are you back?

Female: I’m back. Hong back. Well I ran to my office and it took me 20 minutes.

Nick: Unbelievable. Oh god.

Female: If there was a deity involved it would be much better organized. I don’t think we can invoke that.

Nick: What can I tell you? I will try again.

Female: Okay, so we’ll hold the CCNSO until Siavash gets back in, but he sent the report. Okay, inaudible 2:13:49 because I was sick. Staff report, Nick sent a very long report, which I don’t know if anybody read? Did anyone read that?

Nick: Most of it is annexes to be fair.

Alan: Just for the record.

Annette: inaudible overtalking 2:14:05 …on the list.

Alan: Nick, I don’t remember seeing reports like this before. Have they come and I’ve missed them?

Nick: No you haven’t. I committed at the last meeting to stop providing verbal reports and like everybody else to produce written ones.

Alan: It would help those who are overworked if you would point out that this is the first of the monthly reports, instead of us trying to spend a half an hour searching for them.

Nick: Oh God, sorry about that. group laughs

Female: Okay, so…

Nick: I’m both appalled and happy that my reports are such a…

Alan: As a result, I didn’t have a chance to read the whole thing. group laughs

Nick: Well comments are welcome.

Annette: Nick, I really… I asked for last time for it, but I really, really would appreciate if you could send these things in an e-mail… in the text of an email. It is… it would be really helpful.

Nick: Yeah, I could do that. Sorry about that, but yeah, I can do that. I just figured a 10-page document, you wouldn’t want to really receive that in the body of an email that’s why.

Cheryl: Don’t just do it exclusively that way, because…

Nick: I would give both.

Female: Both.

Jacqueline: Okay, are there other comments on the staff report? I mean we can, if you haven’t had time to read it, we have discussions on specific items on-line.

Cheryl: I just found it extremely useful and I’ve been browsing through it, and I think, you know… thank you, thank you, thank you.

Annette: Nick… Nick, are these public, or is this…?

Nick: Yes, that’s public. That’s a public document. If the public is interested in it, that’s another question, but it is a public thing. I mean, it’s on the wiki now, so anybody who looks at the meeting pages and all that can already get it.

Jacqueline: Right, the abstention questions. I think there was a… Nick did make a summary of the people who… of the questions for people who wanted more information for the… in order to make a decision on the two ALSes that were not voted on because of the number of abstentions. And that information will come to us when?

Nick: We are chasing it down from the various… from the two applicants and I should think it would be imminent really.

Alan: So this is getting the answers to the questions.

Nick: Yes. And they’re aware of this… that we need the answers in order to vote again. So, they’re aware that, you know… the ball is in their court really.

Jacqueline: So we’ll aim for those, I guess, for the July vote.

Nick: Oh I should, I should certainly hope so, yeah.

Jacqueline: The June vote has been slightly delayed because Suzy had a problem?

Nick: Yeah, she had… a computer failure combined with the need to have somebody at inaudible name 2:17:24 help her with the field to explain “no votes”, so that we would have those.

Jacqueline: That was supposed to start on Monday? So… hopefully it will start next Monday?

Nick: I think it will start noon tomorrow.

Female: Tomorrow?

Alan: Nick, in line with the comments from Izumi and Siavash, I think it’s important that we make clear before the vote starts, whether these comments are going to be made public or used purely within the committee.

Male: And mandatory or not?

Male: Well, regardless…

Nick: Well, I mean, I would say that if the committee wishes to have a consolidated committee wider view when a vote is adverse to an application, I think that’s all you’re required to provide.

Female: That is.

Nick: You don’t have to provide individual…

Female: No we don’t.

Nick: …details… information.

Alan: No, but I think members need to feel comfortable in voting “No” on something which in their country or region may be controversial.

Nick: Sure.

Female: Okay. In that case, can we make that decision now?

Female: The motion is set. We will provide reasons for a “No” vote, that those remain confidential to the committee and the only thing that goes out with the explanation of the “No” vote would be consolidated ALAC. These are the reasons and not who said “No”.

Cheryl: No identifications, yeah.

Izumi: Is that to make it a compulsory if you try to vote “No”, or it’s voluntary?

Female: It would have to be compulsory because the people who vote “No”, have to tell us why, because that’s the reasoning that we have to apply to them. And because _each ALS…

Male: inaudible comment due to overtalking 2:19:16

Female: …when we tell them “No” we have to tell them why. If somebody… if people vote “No” and they don’t say why, then we’ll just have to tell them, “No”, and we don’t know why, which we can’t do.

Alan: In the extreme, I would certainly allow someone to put a comment in saying to be discussed verbally.

Nick: I think nobody… I think nobody can prevent you from doing that.

Alan: If, if they feel that the situation warrants it.

Izumi: Well, to be honest, how about say somebody puts in I’d like to, you know, make a “No” comment and, like, this is my comment. Do you take it as a reason or not?

Nick: Well, then we would have to come back and ask you what the reason was in order to produce a consolidated view.

Izumi: Why? The only reason why somebody does it is because he or she doesn’t want to disclose that.

Female: If we have… if we… inaudible due to overtalking 2:20:04

Female: If we turn down an applicant we have to tell them why.

Izumi: …I have not finished please.

Female: Sorry.

Izumi: Then, do you also require the same thing for abstentions, that you should request the comments or whatever when they vote abstention?

Alan: Even more I would think.

Female: Yeah.

Izumi: Okay, then I strongly, strongly be against, even if you vote as my choice I’m very, very, very concerned.

Alan: Izumi, let me take the extreme case. If everyone… if someone is to be voted down and everyone who either abstained or says “No” says I don’t want to say why, the committee is in an untenable position, and therefore we have to resolve that somehow.

Izumi: Right.

Male: Well, inaudible word 2:20:54 look at the proposal I made, which I think, it could be a good compromise, which would be to say the reason for the “No” votes in advance inaudible 2:21:03 so if anyone thinks that he or she might want to vote “No”, he or she can submit a private motion to then support the “No”, so in the ballots you would get “Yes” or “No” because with a inaudible word 2:21:20 for when the other people vote… when everyone votes you would just have to pick the reason by voting “No”. And if the result is “No”, then you already have the reason, you don’t have to go back and collect comments from those people.

Alan: I don’t see how that’s different though. All that says is you give the reason ahead of time. I hear Izumi saying he doesn’t… he wants to be able to not give a reason, period.

Cheryl: Or not be identified.

Male: The difference is that, I mean, the reason being is a collective reason from the start, so I think that even if it’s reached anyway by one or two members inaudible word 2:21:57 to the chair, so you wouldn’t know who was the inaudible word 2:21:59 no motion, it would already be collected, so there would be… I mean, no one would ever ask an individual what’s the reason, it would… become just a collective reason for all the people that go to the inaudible word 2:22:12.

Male: Well, contrary to what Alan suggested, what I’m thinking is some minority member, well one or two people who really can’t really say this or that. I think we have the reason to protect that as a good right.

Female: What do you mean, “Can’t say this or that?” If you say that you want to vote “No”, then you should have a reason, I mean as opposed to, “I woke up this morning and I don’t like the spelling of the name, or something”. You know, you have to have a reason.

Izumi: Having a reason and telling that to public or private is a different thing. And I’m not against making this voluntary, but I’m doing it against making it compulsory.

Alan: What I think I hear, is Izumi is saying he wants a… he does not want the “Yes” and “Nos” disclosed as who voted which way, number one, and he certainly does not want made public the reasons that individual people voted “No”. Is that correct?

Izumi: No. I not against, if everybody agrees then we can disclose who voted which way…

Alan: Okay?

Sp: Why?

Izumi: …unless somebody strongly objects that and we… the rest agree that a consensus to make it a secret vote.

Alan: Okay.

Izumi: Otherwise the vote is open. That’s fine. But what I’m really concerned is to make every member to disclose even to the committee members of why you voted “Yes”, “No”, or abstain, in a compulsory manner.

Female: Unfortunately, we have to tell the applicant that.

Izumi: Right.

Female: We have to tell… we are compelled to tell the applicant, “This is why we voted No.”

Izumi: Sure.

Alan: That’s only relevant if they were rejected. And the problem is if you do not have to explain a “No”, by the time we tally them up, we may find we’re in a position where we’re rejecting an ALS and we don’t have reasons.

Female: Exactly, and this… overtalking 2:24:12

Annette: And this is true for abstentions…

Female: …and “No” votes.

Male: Okay, let me tell… If the majority of the people said “No”, then that sort of expresses the majority of the committee right? And it’s relatively easier to explain why. Right?

Alan: I don’t see the process by which staff can then send a letter out saying, “No and why”.

Izumi: Yeah, the problem is as we face the … a certain number, quite a few people have said “abstention” right? Then it’s very difficult to figure out why, and then, then we are compelled to explain, “Why”. Right?

Alan: I think the same is true for “No”. If, if every abstention had been replaced by a “No” with no reason given…

Izumi: If… I remember the ALAC said voting “No” and that it’s relatively easy to explain why without taking every nine members. Right?

Nick: Not really. In the past, that’s not held out to be true Izumi, really.

Izumi: inaudible due to overtalking 2:25:15 _I mean, not compulsory if you can…

Female: Izumi, I think…

Izumi: …make a voluntary discussion and five or six members of those nine who voted “No” would be, you know, rationally explain that which should be sufficient.

Female: Right.

Female: If you have a voluntary thing and of the nine who voted “No”, nobody volunteers to say “why”.

Izumi: I don’t think so. That’s a difference perhaps of the ideas. But, I’m really… well if you read what Siavash wrote this morning, of you know, abstention is sort of a gentle way of saying “No”. And I quite agree. In my culture, in my society, we do discuss this is same thing. So, what inaudible word 2:26:04 may not necessarily be always all the way true in the other parts of the world. That’s why I’m saying this.

Alan: I understand… I understand and I agree with that.

Izumi: …be mindful of these different cultures’ values when it comes to voting.

Nick: But, the problem there is, is there is an international standard of how you deal with voting.

Izumi: But why?

Nick: That is accepted and that involves that abstentions do not count as “Nos”.

Izumi: But, by the same token there are different interpretations of abstentions so why do you hurry up to make one-sided views.

Male: Nevertheless, our rules do not care how many “Nos” there were. Our rules care how many “Yeses” there were.

Male: Right.

Alan: So, it’s rather, as Izumi says in some cultures, or simply because people don’t want to be confrontational, they may abstain instead of saying “No”.

Izumi: Yeah.

Alan: But they have the same net effect and it doesn’t matter.

Male: I don’t understand what you said in the last sentence.

Alan: I’m saying they have the same net effect on the result. It doesn’t alter the outcome whether you say “No” or abstain.

Male: The net effect in the name 2:27:15 style is a different thing.

Alan: Exactly.

Nick: Well at the moment, it does make a difference, because if you have enough abstentions you don’t have enough cast votes, “Yes I know,” to certify or decertify.

Male: Right.

Izumi: So, I’m not against that we voting and asking people to explain people to explain why, as long as it remains a good voluntary thing. I’m inaudible word 2:27:45 if you make it compulsory and every each member of the fifteen even there’s only one person who wants to be anonymous in the abstention. Then you require, then it goes to the question of eligibility of ALAC members. It eliminates certain people from ALAC candidates.

Alan: Izumi, if we make this balloting confidential, does that remove the need to abstain? In your mind, for social reasons.

Izumi: Most likely yes. But for the transparency, you argue and I agree mostly that it is better to expose as much as possible.

Female: inaudible due to overtalking 2:28:23

Male: I think that in the end people don’t really care about each individual vote, if we were able to provide that clearly even why we reject one. So, that’s the key point. And by the way, another point I wanted to make is one of the few collectings that were fed by the Ombudsman, is that this not really a political decision. It is an administrative decision in the sense that we are not free to judge whether someone should be or should not be inaudible 2:28:55 we just have to apply in the most objective possible manner the criteria that has to be the same for everyone. So the real thing is just whether we think that the criteria are met or not. So, this being inaudible word 2:29:07 judgment politically, we have to explain why we are inaudible judgment on the inaudible. So…

Male: There’s some sensitive matters involved which I don’t want to speak even now, so I’d like to talk in San Juan – face to face.

Male: I second that.

Female: Okay.

Female: Okay, but…

Male: It relates to why we couldn’t make the Asia-Pacific meeting in October in Asia Pacific. Okay?

Female: Okay. Nick, quick question. Do we see one… the inaudible 2:2947 vote now, if we put it off, what are the deadlines… the 90 day deadlines for those?

Nick: Ah…

Female: After San Juan, or before?

Nick: I have to look.

Female: Because I don’t think that we should vote with all these questions hanging.

Nick: inaudible response 2:30:11

Jacqueline: I think everybody kind of agrees with that, because we just started this discussion based on that, that we shouldn’t vote with these questions hanging, right?

Male: Jacqueline, do you mean we’re voting on the “abstain” inaudible 2:30:25 or voting on new ones, because they are not controversial and we know they are not, we might just vote and let them go away.

Jacqueline: Hmm.

Male: I mean, if region advises says yes and informally we… no one has problems, we can just vote while if you anticipate that there might be problems, then we better not wait.

Jacqueline: Yes, that’s the thing. If there’s any that inaudible 2:30:523, but I don’t know if there are any inaudible.

Nick: I’m looking inaudible due to overtalking 2:30:55

Jacqueline: inaudible overtalking

Nick: So we have…

Jacqueline: You don’t have the regional advice on all of them yet.

Nick: Internata cuts out 8 secs

Male: So we can vote it out maybe later.

Annette: Where are these available now?

Nick: They’re all on the Google spreadsheet.

Annette: Google… not on our web-site?

Nick: There’s a link to them on the wiki.

Jacqueline: Okay, hmm…

Nick: Looks like… one… Internata Brazil is overdue now – due the 29th.

Female: Internata Brazil was… inaudible 2:31:44 been approved? Internata Brazil was approved… inaudible

Nick: Oh, sorry. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Let’s see… 9 July 30 June looks like, yeah, it looks like everything’s okay. Inaudible 2:32:04 in North America is a vote due on the 30th of June. But perhaps you could just vote on all the pending applications then, I don’t know.

Female: Okay, what do you all think about then finishing this discussion, making sure that we are all clear on how we want to vote, whether it’s going to be confidential – who’s going to say “yes”, who’s going to say “no”, who’s going to say, one is abstention, okay one is etc., etc., And then vote on all the outstanding ones, and move on from there.

Alan: Fine with me.

Female: Any objections to that?

Alan: Any abstentions? group laughs

Female: I do I question inaudible 2:32:59 answer.

Nick: Yeah, I’ll still get all that information.

Female: We will need all the information. That will give me time to get all the information, that will give us time to discuss how we want to deal with abstentions, how we want to deal with the fact that we have to provide reasons if we turn them down, whether we’re going to go anonymous or not, etc., etc. So, we will find time to put that…

Nick: Alongside the others vote, application related.

Female: But we have to find time to put that discussion on… Do you want the discussion to be open or just ALAC?

Alan: I think we need just ALAC?

Female: Yes, I agree, just ALAC.

Jacqueline: So, we would need to find a just ALAC space, somewhere… at 6:00 in the morning.

Nick: Hmm…

Female: Well it goes along with, also a little bit, with the discussion of the whole application renewal process… I mean, excuse me, the…

Female: Right. But, the application criteria is on the agenda for the public ALAC meeting. That’s why I asked if we wanted it public or private.

Alan: Ah, you’re right.

Female: Yeah, but that we have to discuss it in a connected way – either in the preparation of the public then, probably that is the only one which makes sense right?

Female: We have to discuss it before the public one.

Nick: Or, you could discuss all of this vote-related stuff privately and come to, hopefully, some conclusion about it and then just discuss that in the public one.

Alan: In a fake public meeting.

Female: Yes, a fake public meeting. inaudible group overtalking 2:34:51

Alan: That was a joke.

Female: A well prepared public meeting. inaudible group overtalking 2:34:57

Alan: Thank you.

Nick: Well, cause they might not want to hear every English expression 2:34:59 here.

Female: They won’t.

Alan: Nick, talking about budgets. Does the budget allow for a large integral clock? We’re going to have to manage time very carefully at this point. laughs We’re not very good at this.

Nick: Do you want a big stopwatch on the wall? laughs

Alan: Maybe, I just note that we’re not very good at this. We’re into our sixth half hour of the one-hour, or the third… fourth half hour of the one hour meeting.

Nick: Well, you know the other thing to do is to say in advance, that these are the intervals we have and have madam chairman say, “Right. We have five minutes left.”

Jacqueline: I tried… I tried doing that but there’s so much… but, people get… want to express. I try to allow people trying to express themselves. I keep chopping the agenda myself as we go along.

Nick: I mean, the other question is, is it possible to have a sub-committee deal with these questions to the extent possible in advance?

Female: I would love it.

Alan: If we could actually do work between meetings – yes.

Female: Okay.

Nick: Not to put more work on your shoulders and everything, but…

Cheryl: I think that might be a good way to go forward after our face-to-face. I think part of the time drifting here, is… I would suggest, perhaps a result of a very newly formed group of us coming in and inaudible 3 or 4 words a lot of silly complex issues and major pieces of turning point policy that needs to be discussed, a lot of having to play catch-up, and really, the best place to do that is finalizing it face-to-face, and then move on in a smarter way.

Female: Good point.

Nick: Well shall I try and find a spot on the schedule that does not send the liaisons into too many problems?

Female: Yes, that would be good.

Nick: And, just say, look here’s the choice… I’ll call you Jacqueline, maybe… if it’s all right with everybody, I’ll just call Jacqueline, go through the options and make two hours? What do you want? And we just find the best time we can and set it up.

Female: Yeah.

Nick: If that’s okay with everybody.

Male: Give it a go.

Cheryl: I can send it sandwiches and juice. We could work through whatever.

Nick: I’m happy to do that. By the way, the RALO meetings have food and two coffee breaks. That’s a lunch and two coffee breaks.

Female: Okay, so we will…

Nick: And you have a coffee break.

Jacqueline: San Juan… The route of procedure that Vittorio had sent out, we had agreed on pretty much all of the items in it. We just needed to look at the last document to make sure that it was okay. I didn’t get any feedback on that, so can we presume that it’s okay and that nobody has any objections or changes to it? Or, does this mean that nobody read it? group laughs

Alan: Perhaps better not to ask?

Male: The last draft only had a couple of open points which were already discussed in previous teleconferences, so there wasn’t really anything to discuss.

Sebastien: overtalking …I have some remarks, but I don’t feel good to send like that my remarks. I was not impervious to discussion and I was thinking that we will discuss that face to face. Sorry about that, but if not I will give you my feedback on this document. I have some question on this.

Jacqueline: Okay. Could you… if you email those, then we can discuss it on-line and we just get to the adoption of it.

Sebastien: Well, yeah, I think we can inaudible 2:38:56, so I mean, I inaudible objections but I think that most of it was just agreed so it would be better since we actually need the process to just…

Female: …adopt the process right now and then the process itself instead of making changes to the process?

Alan: I’m not sure that’s fair to the new people, because it’s very, very difficult to change something. Just the inertia will always lower the priority of that. Although, I understand the need for getting this done, I sort of would prefer to see, over a short period of time – let’s say within the next four days or five days – any objections raised and brought on the table. I don’t think we can allow a lot of time to it, but in fairness this has gone on a long time and the cast of characters has changed a lot.

Cheryl: Sebastien, how extensive are your questions? We couldn’t deal with some of them now?

Sebastien: Mmm… I don’t know. I’m not sure that I am ready for that.

Cheryl: Okay.

Jacqueline: Okay:

Sebastien: I read it one week ago and I put some notes on that, but I will send you… I’ll try to send you a mail in the next two days, giving my… but, yeah, my main thing is that there is some discrepancy in the text, that’s why I need to re-read it before to say inaudible 2:40:33. But I will read it and send it within the next two days, my questions.

Jacqueline: Vittorio you look out for that, and…

Vittorio: Yeah, okay fine.

Jacqueline: All right?

Vittorio: I just hope that if we… encompass that and get to vote on it in San Juan, then in San Juan we will have too many people from North American RALO…

Female: No. No, no, no. We will approve it before, because everybody else has pretty much agreed on the bulk of it.

Male: No, I’m just trying to get rid of my “action” items. group laughs

Jacqueline: Issues Report, Alan, it’s there with the GNSO, what’s the next step?

Alan: I’m sorry, I missed the first half of that. Your voice kind of…

Jacqueline: Issues Report. It’s there. overtalking 2:41:26

Alan: As I said in my report, it’s going to be discussed at the San Juan meeting. I don’t have the exact timing. When I… I’ll check and try and make sure the committee knows, in case you want to be present at the meeting.

Annette: We would like to be there, yes.

Alan: It’s a substantive issue there is a strong feeling that in the past PDPs have not produced good results because of lack of real focus of identifying what the real problems are, that the PDP is trying to address, and of course a lot of what is in the Issues Report are social issues and it’s not clear what part you want to change. So, I think the committee has to decide, “Do they have enough information”… or the council, “Do they have enough information to put a process in place,” and there’s various forms a PDP can take. And that needs to be discussed.

Nick: Shall I provide an update on that… on this subject, from being here in Brussels and all of that?

Alan: Sure.

Nick: The Issues Report that you have received has… a couple of comments were made on the GNSO council list – I’m sure you have seen those – about additional information or clarification which should be added to the report, so a revised version is about to come out with those additional points in it. The French and Spanish translations have been completed and will be revised to include the revisions before San Juan, and the domain tasting workshop agenda has just been set and will shortly be released and it’s… it features Alan, amongst others, and then…

Alan: Thanks for telling me. laughs

Nick: Well, yeah, we were going to invite you, and we are going to invite you, and hopefully you’ll say yes, otherwise…

Alan: What day is this on?

Nick: This is Tuesday afternoon. Well I’m giving you advance warning you’re about to get invited to make a presentation. But, just a few minutes of why ALAC…

Alan: Nick, Nick… vis-à-vis the travel policy, I’m sorry, according to my policy you have to give me enough advance notice…

SP: Oh… laughs

Alan: …or I’m afraid I can’t attend.

Nick: There are remote participation offers for you in that case.

Male: Did you say Tuesday?

Nick: I believe its Tuesday. I’m a little punchy now…

Male: Tutorial on Sunday?

Nick: Sorry, tutorial Sunday. Sorry, sorry.

Female: Yes.

Nick: Yes, and also then three… it will focus a lot of what could be next. The options related to closing the ad grace period and otherwise inaudible word overtalking 2:44:06

Male: inaudible overtalking

Nick: On Sunday, yes at 5:30. From 5:30 to 1900 hours.

Male: Who is the key organizer?

Nick: I’m kind of the key organizer. I’m certainly… there’s four or five of us who have put it together. Patrick from the registries, Maria 2:44:24 and myself, mostly, with Kurt Pritz, too. It’s been kind of a large group thing.

Male: Nobody from ALAC yet?

Nick: And Jacqueline Morris is the Master of Ceremonies of this.

Jacqueline: Thanks. Thanks for telling me.

Nick: Yeah, thought I’d tell you the good news too.

Alan: I suggest you invoke my rule too. laughs

Nick: So provided that all of ALAC doesn’t go on strike, you’ll basically be the features of the meeting.

Male: Yeah, I assume we have Alan to be there as a speaker.

Nick: He is there as a speaker. He’s the first speaker, in fact. He’s introducing the whole subject.

SP: He just doesn’t know.

Nick: As why did At-Large… why did ALAC put the Issues Report forward and you know the reasons why and all that?

Alan: Actually, it was put forward by ALAC before I came.

Nick: Yeah, well you don’t have to say that. Take credit.

overtalking 2:45:17

Female: You pick up very fast Alan.

Nick: So, yes At-Large will feature… ALAC will feature a… overtalking 2:45:27

Izumi: My problem is, if it’s Sunday evening I may not be able to attend. Depends on my flight confirmation and inaudible word 2:45:33

Female: You’re not confirmed yet?

Izumi: No, the confirmed one arrives late. I’m trying to change it to earlier flight direct from Washington, DC, which still I’m waiting.

Nick: Izumi needed a round-the-world ticket so I approved him buying his separately. He has to go to various other places too.

Female: Okay.

Nick: So, that’s the main news I had on those two subjects.

Jacqueline: Okay, the Staff report and registrars we discussed already. San Juan meeting, we’ve been talking about that. inaudible overtalking 2:46:10

Annette: So do we have a… When do we start together. I mean, the list here on San Juan meeting does not tell anything about where we actually meet or do we have a dinner, or… and what RALOs are we going to join and so on, and so on.

Nick: Not quite sure what you mean. Are you at the Meetings and Events page for Puerto Rico, ICANN meeting on, on the…

Annette: I’m looking at the link San Juan meeting At-Large.

Nick: Right.

Annette: And it says “Workshop on tTLDs”, it says meeting agendas and documents, officials item meetings, but this is not what I’m talking about. someone sneezes …is Tuesday. someone sneezes

Nick: Bless you.

Annette: Gazoontite.

Nick: Yes, for the RALOs, their schedules on those two calendars but I will provide back-links to their schedules from yours. someone sneezes Good idea. Bless you.

Female: Sorry.

Female: The RALOs are on Sunday so far?

Nick: The RALOs are both on Sunday, yes.

CLO: And the domain tasting workshop needs to be on there?

Female: It’s not until the evening.

Nick: That’s on there? On Sunday evening, 24th.

Annette: It’s not on this list here.

Cheryl: It’s not on that page.

Nick: Well, hold on.

Female: Well Jacqueline, I say on the meeting page that we’re going to have three sessions with CCNSO on the coordination discussion. Is this the case for a meeting?

Jacqueline: We are to have a meeting, a joint meeting, with the CCNSO on the 25th, on the Monday, and then on the 27th…

Female: A meeting with us.

Cheryl: But we need an open meeting in between that.

Nick: I’m looking at this, the schedule page on ft.ican.org ALAC and I see “Domain Tasting Workshop, 24th June”.

Annette: …interesting.

overtalking 2:48:18

Nick: What’s that?

Male: The official site of ICANN, that says differently.

Cheryl: No, I’m looking at San Juan meeting, linked off a meeting that I’ve been using all night, and…

Nick: It’s there.

Cheryl: Look, I know it’s 3:00 am, but I’m… oh there it is right underneath.

overtalking 2:48:46

Annette: I used the link from our own Agenda, from today.

Cheryl: Yes, I see… under there…inaudible 2:48:54

Annette: If you use this link, it says San Juan meeting, and this is our ALAC San Juan meeting. I understand, right? And this link starts with Agenda Suggestions, and Workshop, and Registrar Issues, and so on.

inaudible overtalking 2:49:17

Nick: It’s at the bottom of the page there.

Female: Excuse me?

Cheryl: It’s not in date order which is what I inaudible 2:49:24. If you go down underneath Meeting and Agendas, underneath At-Large, and then eventually there’s a 24th of June in the third section, underneath Meeting Agendas.

Nick: I mean, I can put it in date order. I just put it in, sort of, your meetings versus the meetings for everyone. some overtalking here

Female: Jacqueline are we going to have At-Large, a policy workshop right? I just can’t see the time and date. inaudible overtalking 2:49:58

Female: So, it’s Thursday…

Nick: Yeah, the idea was to have that as half of the two-hour ALAC meeting on…

Female: Right, it’s Thursday afternoon.

Nick: …Thursday.

Female: But it’s not on here.

Male: Is it still the first ALAC meeting on Thursday?

Nick: That’s what we were talking about earlier – to have an earlier one as well.

Alan: Nick, is the domain tasting workshop on the GNSO schedule? It doesn’t seem to be.

Male: Maybe he has an out-of-date one.

Nick: Ah… don’t know. To be honest with you, I haven’t looked at the GNSO only schedule.

Female: Well I suggest that we ask Nick to gather together and, with Diane in those areas of the staff people, and get the latest, greatest, most organized Agenda to us.

Annette: And is there a possibility that we have dinner right at the beginning, at Saturday night, or something. I think this is… We have all these new people here and we should really meet right at the beginning at the start.

Nick: Lots of people won’t be there on Saturday evening.

Female: I was just going to say… One minute to midnight, I’ll be flying in.

Annette: Okay, Sunday afternoon, sometime before the Domain…

Nick: Meetings all day.

Female: But, you come out of the regional meeting and then straight into the domain tasting.

Female: Actually they overlap a little bit.

Nick: They don’t now.

Female: We’re looking for times… they don’t now? Okay. But, we’re looking for times to meet which is why we were making the joke about I suggested to Nick six o’clock in the morning. But we’re going to find time.

Annette: What about Monday evening?

Female: That’s a proposal.

Annette: Monday evening for dinner. A 6:00 dinner meeting.

Jacqueline: There is a… that’s the opening thing.

Nick: That’s the opening night. Yes.

Jacqueline: That’s the opening ceremony that goes until eleven.

Annette: Before, before the opening ceremony.

Jacqueline: Annette, we’re trying to find time…

Annette: Okay, good.

Jacqueline: …and as soon as we find time, it will... Nick has a listing of several things that he has to squeeze in from, just from this teleconference.

Nick: Yeah laughs.

Jacqueline: So, I would suggest that we…

Cheryl: Don’t discount your suggestion of breakfast. It may not need to be 6:00 am, but you know,

Jacqueline: No, I’m not discounting breakfast…

overtalking

Nick: We will try, literally, we will even go that far, if we need… I mean, look, I know that’s not ideal, but I’ll just talk to Jacqueline and if that’s the best option we’ll come back to you and I’ll get you breakfast if I have to. And we can have a buffet breakfast and you can eat and, you know, talk.

Female: You would have to.

Nick: I know, I don’t mind doing that. I just have to tell them a little bit in advance, but other than that it’s…

Annette: I would say by Friday morning, we will have it kind of sorted out and organized schedule? Because, it also depends on who flies in when, which we should have… which we now have organized since it will since… they should have booked and organized already.

Nick: There is a list of when everybody arrives.

Female: So we know already.

Nick: Yeah, there is a list, because they gave me a list of everybody’s stuff, so…

Female: Right, so now we can…

Nick: Compare.

Female: …be sure as to who comes in when and when we can meet. Okay? So that we will get Friday?

Nick: Before. Jacqueline, I’ll get that to you before.

Jacqueline: Just say, “ALAC, you’ll get it Friday morning.”

Female: If you look at ALAC that size and this is a schedule here and the thing is that Sunday night is workable after the tutorial for domain tasting.

Female: No, there’s probably going to be an outreach event that the… that ALAC might… there’s probably going to be and ALAC is supposed to be there to , you know, say “hi” to all the ALSes and all the potential ALSes and why they should join and all that.

Male: I have a GNSO meeting, ah, dinner. But I can skip it.

Female: So I see another problem is there is conflict between all the potential policy workshops with the public forum on Thursday, the 28th.

Nick: Why would that be?

Female: It will be in the morning.

overtalking

Female: …Thursday morning and now it’s Thursday afternoon.

Female: But in afternoon, it will be ALAC meeting. There’s a difference, or do we like to merge these two?

Female: The timing is that the… in the four hours we do two things.

Female: Two things in four hours?

Female: We do two things in four hours.

Male: I have to drop off, sorry, good-night.

good-nights are said

Jacqueline: Anything else for anybody who’s still on?

Alan: I have to drop off in a minute and I’d like to say two things if I could have a minute?

Female: Yes, please.

Alan: Number one, with regard to the Domain Tasting meeting on Sunday, Nick can you make sure you coordinate with the GNSO people, because my understanding was they were planning on having a session on Domain Tasting at their public forum.

Nick: Yes, there is going to be that as well. That’s additional.

Alan: Somewhat confusing to the general public. One other thing, could I ask please as a priority matter, that the membership of the committee be updated. On the ICANN web-site, it still has membership which is six months out of date. And, on the “ALAC Working Wiki” it says the only members are Jacqueline and Izumi.

Nick: That was voluntary for people to… overtalking

Alan: I understand that. Can we put the names in without links then? Just so if someone says, “Who the hell is the ALAC” – excuse the language – they can go find an answer which is moderately close to reality.

Jacqueline: Okay.

Alan: I won’t even guess what the ALAC private wiki says, I didn’t even look at that one. But just the two official ones, have incorrect information and out-of-date information.

Female: inaudible response 2:56:22

Alan: Good-bye all. disconnects

Female: I think that’s it.

Jacqueline: Well I think it should end it, it being a 3 hour meeting.

Cheryl: Oh yeah, but you did have that “lump” in the middle which is exceptional.

Female: But Jacqueline, I still have little concern over doing two things in four hours.

Jacqueline: No, the inaudible 2:56:51. You need more than two hours to do it?

Female: No, for my session, it could be just one hour. But we have other policies to talk about, so… last time… inaudible 2:57:10 it took at least three hours.

overtalking discussion

Nick: We could go long you know. We could go long.

Female: We could meet until midnight.

Female: laughs

Nick: I see you’re all just overjoyed at the idea of going, you know…

Jacqueline: I’m just putting… we’re putting the policy stuff first, and giving it two hours. If it goes a little long, it goes a little longer. Because the other part is the ALAC… is the public ALAC meeting where people can ask us what we’re doing and why we’re doing it, and all of that. And we discuss our bits and get input from people on our bit, but that can fly, because it’s nothing… the actual things that are going to happen at the ALAC meeting are things that we’ve… it just like approving… acknowledging things that we’ve already discussed.

Female: Well… but Jacqueline, think about that. We won’t have any internal meeting.

Female: Oh, you’re expecting all the discussion will be happening inaudible

Female: Oh, okay.

Jacqueline: Where Nick and I are going to find whether we eat breakfast with each other every morning, or lunch, or dinner… wherever we find time, we’re going to meet and have one issue every chunk or whatever.

Nick: This proxy meeting may be the death of me. group laughs It really may.

Female: Oh Nick, come on.

Nick: No, you don’t understand. I mean, I’ve got a… my assistant is like down to like ten hours a week, and that’s pushing it and I’m not have the new people for a couple months. It’s way over 18 hours a day now. So…

overtalking

Female: So, but here we talked about support from the ALAC web-site, I said that I haven’t done it. I apologize. Ombudsman, we’re not going to bother with for now. We did talk about it briefly in the beginning. The Staff List of Policy Committees and Working Groups, Nick is going to send an email. Regional activities – we’ve pretty much talked about regional activities while we’ve been going through, unless there’s anything else that anybody wants to bring up in the next two seconds?

Female: I do have a small word 2:59:41 about Asia-Pacific, and that the secretaries and executives on list with the ALAC reps has formulated at least the beginnings of a work plan and so that we’re aiming at a face-to-face meeting for that sub-group of the AP-RALO, July yet to be totally tightened down to venue and days, but that’s a further number of issues, we feel the opportunity to meet face-to-face in our fairly widely spread geographic space, is very important and we are, at the moment, talking about tying in those activities with other calendared activities, so we can maximize outreach and inaudible 3:00:38 ALSes. … but as concise as I can do.

Jacqueline: Yes, thank you very much. I actually do have a suggestion that maybe the secretary asks from each region, now that we have some kind of up and running, also give us a regional report before the teleconference.

overtalking

Female: You heard about the possible face-to-face meeting in Hong Kong in July, right from the Secretariat.

Female: There’s Hong Kong and an Indian venue on the calendar at the moment, which has not been…

Female: It would be concurrent with the ICANN regional registrar meeting in Hong Kong.

Female: That is one of the suggestions, yes.

Female: Right.

3:01:29 musical interlude 3 or 4 secs

Female: Oh my God. What was that?

Nick: Sorry, I somehow knocked a button and put you guys on hold. group laughs

Female: And that is “hold”?

Nick: Probably appalling hold music.

Annette: Is that your private music? Is that your style Nick?

Nick: No, I don’t know what it is. It’s whatever’s on this phone here, I’m in a room somewhere downstairs.

overtalking

Hong: Right, I may not be able to attend the meeting with the proposed date of July 23rd or 24th. So I suggest that we have it a little bit later that week, so I can fly back from Latin America. Another issue is that the third ICANN meeting of this year, there will not be in Asia Pacific.

Female: Yes there are.

Female: inaudible

Cheryl: And, Hong, just to show you one of the reasons I can’t say to you that this is going to be with that regional meeting, is that your proposal for the later date is being considered is a highly likely option, but some other dates are being looked at with other venues. So, we are more likely to meet at the latter end of that regional meeting, if we meet with that regional meeting, and in terms of being in sync, we’re looking at, I think we did dates… provisional dates for consideration with other people’s calendars, I think three years down the track… mainly with some IP TLD and those sorts of things. People should be able to plan in the future. But we’re taking too much time for the IP inaudible word 3:03:17 report.

Hong: Right, right, but people have raised a question is that whether this AP-RALO would like to have a signing ceremony in one of the regional meetings, or in Los Angeles, or in next ICANN meeting in 2008.

Female: The most likely, as I understood it, was the February Asia-based meeting.

Hong: Oh.

Female: That’s certainly all the traffic I’ve seen on the inaudible 3:04:03 network.

Hong: Okay.

Female: Because that way all of the ALSes can attend.

Female: Well, it is a bit late, but at least inaudible 3:04:14.

Female: Well, and that was the basis of my comment when the question of how did we feel about the meeting now being in North America again in October, November. Earlier on in the meeting. Not the inaudible 3:04:33, but there’s not a lot we can do about it. cuts out 2 secs

Jacqueline: Okay. Anything else before we go off?

Vittorio: Any questions about the inaudible 3:04:50

Female: There were a couple of questions that Nick took down for you Vittorio. Right?

Nick: Yes, do I need to tell you them now, or shall I just…?

Vittorio: If you like, if you want to send them by email.

Nick: Yeah, because I’m aware of the fact that I have a dinner with the staff and I’m going to literally start missing it if I don’t leave here at 7:00 pm.

Female: So, maybe it would be best if you just forward them to Vittorio and you can make notes and send them back…

Nick: Yeah, and I’ll post the… I’ll post the notes up tomorrow from this call.

Female: Okay.

Female: Okay, great. So…

Female: Well thank you everybody for this long and arduous meeting and I really, really hope that we can get them down to the original one hour. group laughs

Vittorio: inaudible response …a world record.

Female: Well this one is really… because we started at quarter to, because it took so long to get everybody together, this one… and skipping out the hour and five minutes that we had for the budget, we really are under two hours.

Female: It is exceptional I think. I don’t think we’d use this as a benchmark. I mean, there’s a lot of other issues. However, it’s 3:15, I might have breakfast now.

Annette: Good night, good morning to everyone.

everyone says good-byes

Nick: Bye.

Veronica: Ah, Nick?

Nick: Yes?

Veronica: You still there?

Nick: I am.

Veronica: This is Veronica speaking.

Nick: Hello.

Veronica: I was on line all the time, so my ear is already red.

Nick: laughs Yes I know the feeling.

Veronica: But it has been the longest, let’s say, conversation that I’ve ever listened to, but anyway, it was really useful even if it took so long. The most, let’s say, unusual thing was that I listened to people without knowing who they are except for you and for Annette. Are you still there Nick?

Nick: Yes.

Veronica: Okay. And I think I have some suggestions which I really will email to you later, but email, regarding to the meeting that we will have from now on, because especially for the new members, it would be… really, really important to know who are the people who are on the line and who are talking, you know all these things, are really, really important.

Nick: Well, please do send it…

Veronica: Because it’s like…

Nick: …and copy in Jacqueline on it, also.

Veronica: Yes, yes, okay. But in general, it was really useful and thank you very much for all inaudible 3:08:00 for the time.

Nick: Thank you for…

Veronica: Even at my contribution at this time, even if I have a passive role, but I have lots of comments and I will email to you later.

Nick: Well, I’ll look forward to receiving them.

Veronica: Um hum. Okay, thanks a lot and bye-bye.

Nick: Bye.

End of Audio 3:08:24