Logo

Terri Agnew's Personal Meeting Room
Julie Bisland
38:22
Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call on Thursday, 10 October 2019 at 03:00 UTC for 90 minutes.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
39:53
Hey stop at an hour in and I will be clear for my next call of course :-)
Steve Chan
42:52
Document available here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/15S_sUuP_gmKqba26tU9kYQ8mVF76W_3CSl4raxSgvm8/edit?usp=sharing
Jeff Neuman (Com Laude)
45:36
no problem
Steve Chan
45:45
Guidelines here: https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/cpe/guidelines-27sep13-en.pdf
Justine Chew
50:45
Apologies for joining late.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
52:39
audio?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
52:45
back now
Steve Chan
52:52
nope
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
52:58
no problem here
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
52:59
lucky me
Justine Chew
53:11
There was also the need to be flexible with the definition of "Community" -- certain communities aren't organized in a formal structure. I wonder if there is opportunity to update this?
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
53:29
+1 Justine
Justine Chew
54:13
Ah. We're going through comments now. Got it.
Justine Chew
54:18
And ALAC.
Steve Chan
01:00:50
With the limited attendance, I am not going to bother with the timer, unless someone objects
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:01:20
FIne by me @Steve
Justine Chew
01:02:12
Yes, As in does not accept loose association.
Justine Chew
01:04:46
How about the possibility or feasibility of having Community members serving as CPE panellist?
Justine Chew
01:05:32
ICANN Community
Justine Chew
01:06:11
They understand nature of "communities" from ICANN perspective
Justine Chew
01:06:35
Just raising as a thought
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
01:07:13
that is why the original AGB definition suffices, however those interpreting can’t be so closed minded
Justine Chew
01:08:19
Correct, it's a balance between appointing people who CAN understand and people who ARE LIKELY to understand. Again, just a thought.
Justine Chew
01:09:25
I apologize but I have to drop off now, I am double-booked this morning actually. Will catch up on the recording and notes.
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
01:09:28
yes
Jeff Neuman (Com Laude)
01:12:12
Thanks....the intent was to apply Conflict of Interest Policies to all Evaluators and Panelists
Rubens Kuhl
01:13:39
Was there any traction in the discussions of changing the result of CPE from kicking other non-community applications (absolute priority) to something in the middle (relative priority) ?
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
01:15:29
+1 on providing research link
Steve Chan
01:16:46
I paused the screen share for a moment, but that preliminary recommendation was added in brackets above
Jeff Neuman (Com Laude)
01:19:29
Thanks @Steve
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:19:41
switching this call to mobile app now Sorry tardiness in replies and use of chat will be limited
Julie Bisland
01:19:54
Thank you, Cheryl, noted
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
01:31:18
interesting point
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
01:32:17
perhaps forcing the objection to validate their concern through CQs would have been wise
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
01:32:32
*opposition, not objection
Steve Chan
01:32:42
all CQs had a word count restriction. i don’t recall if they were different for different types of evaluations.
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
01:33:25
there were word count restrictions in the application as well
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
01:33:30
i don’t recall the limits however
Steve Chan
01:33:53
Yes, definitely word count restrictions for the initial application.
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
01:42:38
balancing opposition against the support is key
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:51:58
t
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:52:14
time check 15 mins
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:58:04
Lots covered today, people even though the attendance was low(ish) So THANKS to all who could attend... Bye for now...
Julie Bisland
01:58:07
NEXT CALL: Tuesday, 15 October 2019 at 15:00 UTC for 90 minutes
Rubens Kuhl
01:59:22
Bye all!