Page History
...
Info |
---|
PROPOSED AGENDA
5. Confirm next steps and next meeting: Wednesday 24 April at 14.00 UTC. BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS new gTLD AP CCWG Agreements - 6 April 2019 Charter Question #6 Review Template - updated 4 April 2019 Charter Question #7 Review Template - 7 March 2019 Charter Question #8 Review Template - 4 April 2019 |
Info | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
GNSO transcripts are located on the GNSO Calendar |
Tip | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
Apologies: John Levine, Maarten Botterman, Vanda Scartezini, Alberto Soto, Sally Costerton (staff), Emily Crane Pimentel (staff), Sebastien Bachollet |
Note |
---|
Notes/ Action Items NOTES / ACTION ITEMS These high-level notes are designed to help the CCWG navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/DLHDAw .
2. Welcome – DOI / SOI Updates Please remember to check your SOI/DOIs on a regular basis and update as needed
3. Update on status of outstanding action items: a. FAQs
b. Comment #4 (charter question #2) - Marilyn, Elliot, Jonathan, Alan and Maureen to develop draft language for inclusion
Action item #1: staff will work on the scheduling of a call for the small group. Aim: have the input by the next call. Ideally discuss on the mailing list prior to that. c. Comment #1 (charter question #3) – See modified language suggested by Eliott (“Neither the Board nor staff will be taking decisions on individual applications but will instead focus its consideration of the slate on whether the rules of the process were followed by the independent panel.”)
d. See overview of CCWG agreements to date (see attached) and latest versions of templates (see https://community.icann.org/x/zYMWBg)
4. Continue review of comments:
a. Charter question #6 input Q6. | comment #3:
Action item #2: comment #3. Staff to add clarification, aligned with the conversation, regarding the need for a level playing field. Language for the implementation team needs to be added on how to best support applications from diverse backgrounds. Q6 | comment #4:
Action item #3: comment #4. leadership team to revise the language to be included in the guideline. For discussion during the next call. Q6 | comment #5: Action item #4: comment #5. Leadership to make a recommendation, and to propose it to the group. b. Charter question #7 input Q7 | comment 1:
Action item #5: comment #1. Staff to review the board input on this topic through the FAQs to be circulated shortly. Are further changes needed? Other items make it clear that board is not involved in the evaluations. CCWG to further consider guidance to be provided for the implementation phase in relation to the criteria to be applied to confirm and ensure 'independence'. Q7 | comment #2:
Q7 | comment #3:
Q7 | comment #4:
Action item #6: comment #4. Add guidance for the implementation phase regarding language that refers to a "sufficient group of evaluators", and at the same time leaving enough room for the implementation team itself.
Action Item #7: Comment #4. Staff and leadership team to verify whether community involvement in the evaluations is addressed in another charter question? Based on that response, CCWG to consider how the community shall be involved in the evaluation process.
Q7 | comment #5:
Action item #8: Comment #5. clarify language: This has been addressed by previous comments Q7 | comment #6:
Action item #9: comment #6. NCSG reps to clarify what is intended .
Q7 | comment #7:
Q7 | comment #8:
Action item #10: comment #8. review comment in context of broader conversation around role of the community. It is more about fair and balnced representation, and not favouring a particular group. Participation in this effort allows for involvement in the design. Q7 | comment #9:
Action item #11: Comment #9. Leadership team to engage with Allan around a conversation on how such an advisory could look like, what role it could have, in line with the broader conversation of the role of the community in this process. Q7 | comment #10:
Action item #12: comment #10. to be considered with the overal questions regarding role of the community, and the advisory role. Caution: slight difference with what was debated before.
5. AOB templates for all the topics are posted on the wiki. Action item #13: CCWG members are highly encouraged to review all materials ahead of the meeting. Suggestions for agreements should be posted on the mailing list ahead of the meeting. 6. Next call. 24 April 2019 | 14:00 UTC, for 2 hours |