Page History
...
Info |
---|
PROPOSED AGENDA
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS |
Tip | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
Apologies: none |
Info | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
Zoom Recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript and chat) GNSO transcripts are located on the GNSO Calendar |
Note |
---|
Notes/ Action Items ACTION ITEMS/HOMEWORK:
Notes:
2. Work Plan & ICANN77 – see attached slides, #4.
3. Continue Discussion of Task 6 – see Draft Working Document at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m_C4abtrloC21hzbTayllfTwBcgIJ5sB5PGHHzgn9kg/edit?usp=sharing [docs.google.com]and attached slides, starting on slide 6. ODA: Comment from Maureen: “additional resources such as the portal, showcase events, brochures, banners. etc are all these included in the costings that may or may not be ASP-specific but still ASP-related?” Discussion:
Recommendation Guidance 1: Comment from Maureen: “refresh my memory, but can an ASP applicant use ASP "funds" to purchase post-pro-bono-services? And, apart from a fee reduction (which would come out of the applicant's share), what else could an ASP applicant's possible equal allocation be used for?” Comment from Julie, Staff: Thanks Maureen, as the funding is in the form of a fee reduction, there would be no "funds" that the applicant could use to purchase anything. I think what the WG envisioned is that the equal allocation of funding would only be in the form of an equal fee reduction. The WG did not discuss how the applicant could "use" the fee reduction. Discussion:
Recommendation Guidance 2: Comment from Maureen: “should that not be "allocated" or any other term that does not imply that the applicant will "receive" any funding?”
Recommendations 3 and 4: Comment from Maureen: “We need to start the process of getting information out to ALL potential gtld applicants very soon, so that we can identify who the ASP applicants might be, and to start on the ASP as the next step! The timing of this whole process is critical. In the interest of fairness and equity, we cannot rush the ASP but at the same time, we can't drag it out for other applicants.” Discussion:
ACTION ITEM: Rafik has agreed to combine Recommendation Guidance 3 and 4 for WG consideration. |