<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;">
<div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
In the interest of getting this done, I offer the attached revised report, with these changes:</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
1. Made the page 1 edit proposed by Wolf-Ulrich in response to Amr, and added level of consensus, as requested by Amr. It now reads:</div>
<blockquote style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;">
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<font face="Calibri,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Note: Three DT members (IPC, ISPCP, and BC) do not support Council exercising any of the new powers by voting within the present House-bound structure. The recommendation that Council would speak for GNSO therefore has “Strong
support but significant opposition”. Nonetheless, all DT members contributed to consensus recommendations for voting thresholds on the assumption that GNSO Council would approve nominations and actions created under the new ICANN Bylaws. </font>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<font face="Calibri,sans-serif"> </font></div>
</blockquote>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<br>
</div>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
2. On page 4 we follow Matthew’s request to shorten the “not sustainable” point while retaining Amr's added counter-arguments. It now reads: </div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<br>
</div>
<blockquote style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;">
DT members from the Commercial Stakeholders Group said Council should not decide non-policy matters, since ICANN Bylaws say Council is “responsible for managing the policy development process of the GNSO”. This implies that Council is limited to policy and
that GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies should handle other matters. On the other hand, some DT members noted that there is no provision in the Bylaws for any group, be it Council or the GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies, to assume these
new powers and that there is currently no procedure for GNSO Stakeholder Groups to handle these matters.</blockquote>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
For those of you counting words and looking for balance, that paragraph is now 49 words for each point of view! </div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
So, are we good to go??? Please reply by 12 UTC on Wednesday 12-Oct.</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
—Steve</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<br>
</div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<div style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:12pt; text-align:left; color:black; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt">
<span style="font-weight:bold">From: </span><<a href="mailto:gnso-bylaws-dt-bounces@icann.org">gnso-bylaws-dt-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of Matthew Shears <<a href="mailto:mshears@cdt.org">mshears@cdt.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span>Tuesday, October 11, 2016 at 5:36 PM<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span>Amr Elsadr <<a href="mailto:aelsadr@egyptig.org">aelsadr@egyptig.org</a>>, WUKnoben <<a href="mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de">wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Cc: </span>"<a href="mailto:gnso-bylaws-dt@icann.org">gnso-bylaws-dt@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:gnso-bylaws-dt@icann.org">gnso-bylaws-dt@icann.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span>Re: [Gnso-bylaws-dt] Correction<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>Hi Amr - I believe that I suggested more or less the same. The </div>
<div>repetition of the same perspective is unfortunate particularly as it is </div>
<div>made very explicit up front and in the recommendations section.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Matthew</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>On 11/10/2016 21:04, Amr Elsadr wrote:</div>
<blockquote id="MAC_OUTLOOK_ATTRIBUTION_BLOCKQUOTE" style="BORDER-LEFT: #b5c4df 5 solid; PADDING:0 0 0 5; MARGIN:0 0 0 5;">
<div>Hi,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Speaking for myself, I have noted over previous versions of the report that it seemed biased towards the minority view, which is a bit odd. Perhaps less so now, but it does seem to me to still be the case. For one thing, I suggested taking out redundant
text that repeats the same point in multiple parts of the report.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This is on page 3:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>“Some DT members noted that the Bylaws describe the role of GNSO Council to be “responsible for managing the policy development process of the GNSO,” which does not cover the non-policy decisions related to exercise of powers of the Empowered Community."</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>And this is on page 4:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>"Some DT members noted that it was not sustainable for Council to continue taking positions on non-policy matters, since the ICANN Bylaws designate Council as “responsible for managing the policy development process of the GNSO”. This could imply that
Council is limited to policy matters and that GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies should handle other matters.”</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I really don’t understand why they both need to be in the report on two separate pages, when they pretty much say the exact same thing. I already asked for the section on page 4 to be removed. Is there a reason that I am missing to explain it wasn’t?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks.</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</span>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 12pt; border-width: 1pt medium medium; border-style: solid none none; padding: 3pt 0in 0in; border-top-color: rgb(181, 196, 223);">
<span style="font-weight: bold;">From: </span>Steve DelBianco <<a href="mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org">sdelbianco@netchoice.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight: bold;">Date: </span>Tuesday, October 11, 2016 at 5:21 PM<br>
<span style="font-weight: bold;">To: </span>Amr Elsadr <<a href="mailto:aelsadr@egyptig.org">aelsadr@egyptig.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight: bold;">Cc: </span>"<a href="mailto:gnso-bylaws-dt@icann.org">gnso-bylaws-dt@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:gnso-bylaws-dt@icann.org">gnso-bylaws-dt@icann.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject: </span>Re: [Gnso-bylaws-dt] LAST CALL: GNSO Bylaws DT report and matrix -- final version for DT approval<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
<div>Amr — </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Good point about Consensus level, and I thought a lot about that. GNSO Working Group Guidelines (<a href="https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/annex-1-gnso-wg-guidelines-01sep16-en.pdf">link</a>), at Section 3.6, suggests two possible designations for our
recommendations:</div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;">
<div><b>Consensus</b> - a position where only a small minority disagrees, but most agree.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b> Strong support but significant oppositio</b>n - a position where, while most of the group supports a recommendation, there are a significant number of those who do not support it.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>I’d say we had <b>Strong support but significant opposition</b> on the <u>Who</u> and <u>How</u> questions described in the Evolution section of our report.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>And for the recommendations on pages 1-2, I’d say we had <b>Consensus</b> — but qualified by the abstention of CSG reps. </div>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><br>
</blockquote>
<div>
<div>As to whether we drop any discussion of how the DT came to its recommendation, that’s against the GNSO Working Group Guidelines (<a href="https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/annex-1-gnso-wg-guidelines-01sep16-en.pdf">link</a>). Specifically:</div>
<div>
<div class="page" title="Page 9">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<ol start="0" style="list-style-type: none;">
<li>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT;">In cases of </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: TimesNewRomanPS; font-weight: 700;">Consensus</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT;">, </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: TimesNewRomanPS; font-weight: 700;">Strong
support but significant opposition</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT;">, and </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: TimesNewRomanPS; font-weight: 700;">No Consensus</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT;">,
an effort should be made to document that variance in viewpoint and to present any </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: TimesNewRomanPS; font-weight: 700;">Minority View </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT;">recommendations
that may have been made. Documentation of </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: TimesNewRomanPS; font-weight: 700;">Minority View </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT;">recommendations normally depends on text offered
by the proponent(s). In all cases of </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: TimesNewRomanPS; font-weight: 700;">Divergence, </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT;">the WG Chair should encourage the submission of minority
viewpoint(s). </span></p>
</li></ol>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div id=""></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<div>
<blockquote id="MAC_OUTLOOK_ATTRIBUTION_BLOCKQUOTE" style="BORDER-LEFT: #b5c4df 5 solid; PADDING:0 0 0 5; MARGIN:0 0 0 5;">
<div><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div></div>
</div>
</span>
</body>
</html>