[gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Notes from yesterday's SCI meeting

[Ron Andruff]

Dear Marika, 

 

Please put myself and our new BC alternate, Angie Graves, down for items c.
Deferral of Motions and d. Voting Threshold rules for Delaying a PDP. 

 

We also support Staff recommendation:  (Note - Staff would be happy to
prepare a first draft of such a survey that might serve as a basis for
further work / discussion) on item a. WG Survey - Survey on the experiences
with WG Guidelines needs to be added to list of work items. 

 

Thank you,

 

RA

 

Ronald N. Andruff

RNA Partners, Inc.

 

  _____  

From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org
[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 3:31 AM
To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org
Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Notes from yesterday's SCI meeting

 

Dear All,

 

Following yesterday's SCI meeting, please find below the different work
items and related notes. As discussed, members of the SCI are encouraged to
indicate which topics they would be interested in working on so that on the
next call it can be decided how to move forward on these different items.
Attached you'll find the different documents that were used as part of the
discussion.

 

With best regards,

 

Marika

 

WORK ITEMS SCI

 

a. WG Survey 

*	Survey on the experiences with WG Guidelines needs to be added to
list of work items
*	(Note - Staff would be happy to prepare a first draft of such a
survey that might serve as a basis for further work / discussion)

b. Consent Agenda

*	Include procedure sent by J. Scott (see
http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-improvem-impl-sc/msg00146.html) into the
comparison table to facilitate comparison by SCI (Action item: Marika)

c. Deferral of Motions

*	Deferral of motions: currently unwritten rule which allows deferral
upon request from SG/C, which is always allowed. Normally only one time
deferral only, although there have been exceptions in the past. Council has
requested SCI whether a formal procedure is needed / preferred. PDP rules
allow individual member of Council to request deferral on PDP related vote
(once). Individual vs. SG/C? What is the role of 'socializing' motions prior
to formally introducing them - does that reduce the need for deferrals?

d. Voting Threshold rules for Delaying a PDP

*	Threshold rules needed for delaying a PDP - overview of current
rules and recent situation on delaying 'thick' Whois PDP.

e. Proxy Voting Procedure

*	At the last GNSO Council meeting a proxy was requested but not in
the correct way. Do rules need to be adapted to accomodate situations where
no formal proxy can be given? Overview of current proxy voting rules
(section 4.6 of Operating Procedures) provided. Current rules don't provide
for last minute situations, assumes a certain time delay between knowing
that Council member cannot attend Council meeting and giving proxy. Do
youneed to create rules for every possible exception? Several members of the
SCI noted that they do not think modifications need to be made to the
current rules.

d. Update of GNSO Council Voting Results Table

*	As a result of the adoption of the new PDP and related update of the
voting thresholds in the ICANN Bylaws, the voting results table has been
updated. SCI requested to review the table, which has been updated to be
consistent with the changes as a result of the new PDP, so it can be
included in the GNSO Operating Procedures.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-improvem-impl-sc/attachments/20120425/c2d2ef84/attachment.html>