Hello everyone

how far in advance can we expect leadership comments to be populated in the spreadsheets? for example - we have a call Monday but I don't see any leadership comments in the document. Id like ot factor that into my preparation for the calls. thnaks

1 day in advance is tight turnaround

Link to document: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rOqfucddhWhYK8u3-O7IHg772BpjEIGhlmCT_gMRSkQ/edit?usp=sharing

And comments can be shared on the list - like SPIRT email chain

Thanks

sorry for being late

I have an update to my SOI, I stepped down from SSC RySG position.

@Maxim: Noted.

@Julie , thanks

In reviewing the comments, has an analysis been done where comments are similar across groups etc. or are they just reviewed individually.

Thanks

Hand up from Cheryl

line 24

Reducing fees is a Pandora's Box. If ICANN can lower them for certain registries what is keeping them from raising them for others? .museum is an outlier and should stay that way.

I agree Paul and maybe not a conversation for this group.

+1 to Paul

+1 Donna. If the ICANN Board wants to favor one type of speech over another type of speech by reducing or raising its prices, I'm not sure that is something this WG wants to be involved in at all.

Wouldn't that be the type of content based decisions the Board has expressed concern about?

We wanted to ensure that the comments received were well aired by the WG however

I don't think Applicant Support assessment is content based. Isn't is more about underserved regions and slower economies in the Global South etc

@Anne - the .museum example shows it isn't.

.museum was one of the so-called “sponsored” TLDs, was it not? With quite a few restrictions.

@Jeff - you said that the GAC reiterated its Advice. What Communique was that in? Where is it in this comment? Or, did you mean something else besides Advice?

generally speaking - its best if we, the Sub Pro WG, define any terms so they are not misconstrued during implementation

One would think so @Jim

@Jeff - thanks. Sorry to be a stickler, but in ICANNland...

so does anyone NOT want to be clearer in definintion of the term?

and doing it 8BY* the next call so we can discuss and decide/move on

*BY => *BY*

thanks

Here is the current document we are discussing: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Pk3SadfiropKdD387FrgELdulfZuTbUCivf1SId9ZGU/edit#gid=123470843

"shalt"

Very biblical, @Paul.