Comment on GNSO Community Comment 2 (CC2) on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures / Consultation and review

[Farell Folly]

I also  agree with this rationale.

Regards
@__f_f__

PhD Candidate, Universität der Bundeswehr München
Computer Security | Internet of Things
https://www.linkedin.com/in/farellf
________________________________.
Mail sent from my mobile phone. Excuse for brievety.
Le 22 mai 2017 7:24 PM, "Mueller, Milton L" <milton at gatech.edu> a écrit :

> I agree with you Ayden. Lowering entry barriers, not “financial aid,” is
> the solution. Moreover, offering financial aid will encourage some
> applicants to apply even if there is no sustainable market demand. We
> should be talking about exempting developing country applicants from
> expensive regulatory requirements, not offering them subsidies.
>
>
>
> Dr. Milton L Mueller
>
> Professor, School of Public Policy <http://spp.gatech.edu/>
>
> Georgia Institute of Technology
>
> Internet Governance Project
>
> http://internetgovernance.org/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] *On Behalf Of
> *Ayden Férdeline
> *Sent:* Monday, May 22, 2017 10:03 AM
> *To:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> *Subject:* Re: Comment on GNSO Community Comment 2 (CC2) on New gTLD
> Subsequent Procedures / Consultation and review
>
>
>
> Bruna, THANK YOU so much for drafting this. This is excellent. I have made
> a number of edits to this statement, mainly stylistic in nature, but I have
> also added a few comments. I'm not sure that we have an agreed position on
> this topic just yet, particularly in relation to paragraphs #5 and #6. I
> would like to hear from others to see if they think this is a position that
> the NCSG should take. Personally I am reluctant to support a call for
> financial aid for applicants; while the application fee per new gTLD is
> $185,000, my understanding is that the real cost to launch a new gTLD is
> closer to $2,000,000 once you take into account other requirements. So I
> don't think lowering the cost of the application fee is going to have too
> much of an effect on improving consumer choice and the availability of new
> gTLDs in more scripts and languages. But I might be wrong. Thanks again for
> taking the lead on this comment.
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
>
> Ayden Férdeline
>
> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
>
> Subject: Comment on GNSO Community Comment 2 (CC2) on New gTLD Subsequent
> Procedures / Consultation and review
>
> Local Time: May 22, 2017 1:01 AM
>
> UTC Time: May 22, 2017 12:01 AM
>
> From: rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM
>
> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> Bruna kindly volunteered and drafted this response to the Community
> Comment consultation from the new gTLD subsequent procedures working group
> for NCSG https://docs.google.com/document/d/133uzvDQI__
> EmNGhqiDkHW0EvfvKOwLE9m7ozNIZUVNY/edit. the details about the public
> consultation are here https://www.icann.org/public-comments/cc2-new-gtld-
> subsequent-procedures-2017-03-22-en.
>
>
>
> The deadline for submission is the 22nd May, so we have a short time to do
> so. I think we can attempt a late submission and hopefully be accepted
> by the working group. We should review, add comments, editing and be
> tidying up the document in the next 3 days and submitting by this Wednesday
> after endorsement by the policy committee. because of the time constraints,
> please add wording and edits when you make comments.
>
>
>
> looking forward your participation and asking those who were involved in
> the previous new gTLD policy discussion to jump in.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Rafik
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20170523/a6a82db0/attachment.htm>