<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><BASE
href=x-msg://116/>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.6082" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; webkit-nbsp-mode: space; webkit-line-break: after-white-space">
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=178070020-20052011><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>OK with me.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<P style="MARGIN-TOP: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px"><FONT face=arial
color=#000000>Kind regards<BR>Wolf-Ulrich</FONT></P><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=de dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>Von:</B> owner-council@gnso.icann.org
[mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] <B>Im Auftrag von </B>Stéphane Van
Gelder<BR><B>Gesendet:</B> Freitag, 20. Mai 2011 17:36<BR><B>An:</B>
council@gnso.icann.org GNSO<BR><B>Betreff:</B> Re: [council] Re: Statement of
the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone
Report<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>All,
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I have now had time to listen to most of the Council call. I would like
to congratulate Jeff on doing such a good job of chairing the meeting in my
stead, not that I had any doubt ;) My thanks Jeff for stepping in like
that.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I have listened to the Council discussions on the JAS. Let me add just a
few words to your discussions. It is very clear to me that the Council chair
may send an information message to the Board if he or she feels it is
required. The onus here is on the word "information". The message should be
factual only and contain nothing which could be construed as opinion. I was
very comfortable with sending such a message to the Board in this case.
However, once we started discussing, it became clear that some thought the
proposed message not to be only informational. Also, one Councillor called for
a vote. That being the case, I did not feel I could just brush these concerns
aside and instead I proposed a vote on the list.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>The results of that vote are as follows: 6 in favor of message
version A, 7 in favor of message version B and 1 in favor of "none of the
above". To that tally we should add my vote, which would be for version
B.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>So where does this leave us. Well, from both your discussions during the
Council meeting and the vote and the discussion on the list, it is clear that
there is an overwhelming majority for at least one thing: sending a message
(Andrei's vote is really the only one that goes against this). In that regard,
I concur with Jonathan who said on the call that we've probably done too much
work on this already to just not do anything now.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>As for what message to send, that is not quite so easy. The Council is
split, with a small majority leaning towards version B. On the call you all
discussed adding the fact that the GNSO Council will vote on the JAS report at
its next meeting, on June 9. I think this is once again purely factual so I
would suggest we add this to the message. In fact, it seems to me that this
new bit of information actually helps make the message more factual and less
controversial. It helps do away, for example, with considerations of who
chartered what and just keeps the message grounded in facts.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>So I would like to propose this draft, where we just tell the Board where
we're at now and when they can expect something from us.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Thanks,</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Stéphane</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 13px; FONT-FAMILY: 'Segoe UI'">Dear Peter,</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 13px; FONT-FAMILY: 'Segoe UI'"></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 13px; FONT-FAMILY: 'Segoe UI'"> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 13px; FONT-FAMILY: 'Segoe UI'">We understand that ALAC
has forwarded to the Board the Joint SO/AC New gTLD Applicant Support Working
Group (JAS WG)'s Second Milestone Report. As the other chartering organization
of the JAS WG, the GNSO Council notes that it has not yet approved the Report.
A motion to do this was proposed at our May 19 teleconference and tabled until
our next meeting, on June 9.</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 13px; FONT-FAMILY: 'Segoe UI'"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 13px; FONT-FAMILY: 'Segoe UI'">I will therefore look to
get back to you after this meeting to provide you with an update on the GNSO
Council's decision re the JAS report.</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 13px; FONT-FAMILY: 'Segoe UI'"> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 13px; FONT-FAMILY: 'Segoe UI'">I would be grateful if
you could convey the GNSO Council's message to the Board.</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 13px; FONT-FAMILY: 'Segoe UI'"></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 13px; FONT-FAMILY: 'Segoe UI'"></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 13px; FONT-FAMILY: 'Segoe UI'"> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 13px; FONT-FAMILY: 'Segoe UI'">Best regards,</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 13px; FONT-FAMILY: 'Segoe UI'">Stephane van
Gelder</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 13px; FONT-FAMILY: 'Segoe UI'">GNSO Council
Chair</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>