ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [council] Fwd: draft letter on JAS WG to the Board

  • To: <Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [council] Fwd: draft letter on JAS WG to the Board
  • From: "Mason Cole" <mcole@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 08:17:43 -0700
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • References: <4EA93AD20200005B0007E21E@smtp.law.unh.edu>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AcyUuiUF1Ucvq52ETyilv2+ZdDT2oAAAW3Sf
  • Thread-topic: [council] Fwd: draft letter on JAS WG to the Board

Looks good Mary.  Nicely done.

________________________________

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thu 10/27/2011 8:04 AM
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [council] Fwd: draft letter on JAS WG to the Board




Dear all,

Wolf-Ulrich's and my proposed draft is below. Apologies that, due to the 
limited functionality of the email program on my tablet, I've not been able to 
send just the text cut and pasted into a single email.

Please let us know if you are fine with the letter. If I may, can I ask that 
comments be directed as far as possible to the substance rather than style 
(though I'm more than ready to take lessons on that in less time sensitive 
communications :-)

Thanks and cheers
Mary

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: AW: P.S. Re: Draft letter to GAC
From: "<KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>" <KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: Mary Wong <Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>
CC:

Mary, as I said I'm ok with the text.

I would like to ask councillors whether we could give the following hint to the 
board regarding the fee reduction:
<<
In particular we are confident that a common view can be achieved on the fee 
reduction which we see essential for needy applicants who qualify, thereby
ensuring benefits from the new gTLD program are open to all parts of the 
community.
>>

Which may be inserted into the 3rd para (see attached)

See you later
Wolf-Ulrich


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 27. Oktober 2011 15:53
An: Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich
Betreff: P.S. Re: Draft letter to GAC

Oops, I meant draft letter to the Board!

"Mary Wong<mary.wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>" <Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Hi Wolf, thanks for volunteering to help out! What do you think of this -

(From Stéphane as Council chair to Steve Crocker)

Dear Dr. Crocker,

I am pleased to send the following note on behalf of the GNSO Council, in 
relation to the recommendations contained in the Joint Applicant Support (JAS) 
Working Group (WG) Final Report. We understand that the Board has been working 
on the issue of how ICANN can demonstrate its commitment to ensuring fair and 
non-discriminatory access by and adequate support for needy applicants in the 
new gTLD program, and hope that the GNSO community can be of assistance in this 
regard.

The GNSO Council and community which it represents shares the Board's 
commitment and fully supports the goals around which the JAS WG was formed. The 
Council is extremely grateful to the WG and its volunteers, for the incredible 
amount of work and the many substantive recommendations that it made, including 
in the Milestone Reports that were published prior to the Final Report. We 
accepted all the WG reports and have actively encouraged each of the GNSO's 
constituences and stakeholder groups to submit substantive comments and, where 
appropriate, level of support for each of the WG's recommendations.

We understand that the Registry and Non-Commercial Stakeholder Groups have each 
submitted formal comments. We believe that other groups will follow suit. As 
the overall issue and specific recommendations are fairly complex, spanning 
financial, technical and policy implementation matters, we hope the Board 
understands that this is not a topic on which there is a unified community 
consensus. We believe that, as each constituency and stakeholder group's 
comments are received, it will be possible to see where there is consensus 
and/or support, and where there is disagreement.
<<
In particular we are confident that a common view can be achieved on the fee 
reduction which we see essential for needy applicants who qualify, thereby
ensuring benefits from the new gTLD program are open to all parts of the 
community.
>>
In addition, we hope that more specific implementation issues and suggestions 
may emerge from these comments.

We are pleased that the Board has demonstrated a continuing and serious 
interest in the work of the JAS WG, and wish to inform you that the Council and 
GNSO community stands ready to assist the Board in coming to implementable 
decisions regarding this very important issue.

Yours sincerely,
Stéphane Van Gelder
GNSO Council Chair






<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>