<div dir="ltr">Hi all<div><br></div><div>Please see attached in .docx and .pdf an updated paper on Fundamental Bylaws.</div><div><br></div><div>This paper accepted all the tracked changes from the version that was available in Paris. I have received no comments on or off list for further suggestions.</div><div><br></div><div>It then shows some tracked changes, which:</div><div><br></div><div>- row back on CWG inclusions to those the earlier version had (i.e. no ref to PTI, or to the Separation review)</div><div><br></div><div>- adjustment of language to the voting threshold - 3/4 for Board as previous, but proposing 3/4 for community mechanism (so it is symmetrical - last draft had same as for board recall)</div><div><br></div><div>- some other minor grammar changes</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Sorry this is late to the list, but the changes are very minor.</div><div><br></div><div>Jordan</div><div><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 18 July 2015 at 05:29, Jordan Carter <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz" target="_blank">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Hi all<div><br></div><div>We also agreed we would discuss the updated Fundamental Bylaws part of the proposal by email. Please find the paper attached.</div><div><br></div><div>The changes are not significant but there is commentary on one significant issue.</div><div><br></div><div>- WP1 made a call to NOT include the locational requirements in the Articles or Bylaws as "Fundamental" - they would still be protected in the bylaws and Articles, and would be subject to the Standard Bylaws veto if a proposal to change that was ever made.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Other points:</div><div><br></div><div>- there is text to explain this more clearly, based on feedback in the comments and at meetings</div><div><br></div><div>- clarified (but may be too far) that the Separation review and PTI would be Fundamental Bylaws, as well as the CSC and IFR. (I think we need to take these back out.)</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Please read, discuss, etc.<br clear="all"><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>cheers</div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div>Jordan</div><div><br></div></font></span></div></div></blockquote></div>
</div></div></div>