From wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de Tue Oct 1 18:54:31 2013 From: wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de (WUKnoben) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 20:54:31 +0200 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting In-Reply-To: <6D300928-C17B-4D43-BB27-E7E3F094E0C8@acm.org> References: <01aa01ceba43$cf1247e0$6d36d7a0$@rnapartners.com> <6D300928-C17B-4D43-BB27-E7E3F094E0C8@acm.org> Message-ID: <8ABD79B013D045EB974EEC13BFCBE63A@WUKPC> GNSO meetings on Sunday are planned so far until 16:30 - but 1. closed SG meetings are scheduled from 16:30 2. usually there is a board/GAC meeting scheduled later in the afternoon Everyone has to follow her/his preferences. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- From: Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 1:14 AM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting Hi, Meeting Sunday afternoon should be fine as long as it is fit into the GNSO Council schedule for that day. Sundays are often rather busy. I think a 90 minute meeting might make sense if we can somehow schedule it as a way to get this committee back on track. I feel we have lost our way over the last few months and need a reset. It would also be useful to have an open meeting, which I assume this would be, so that others who might be interested in the topics could get involved. avri On 25 Sep 2013, at 19:06, Ron Andruff wrote: > Dear Julie and Committee Members, > > With all of the new faces on the SCI, and with Charter work to do along > with the rest of the outstanding issues, I am going to suggest that we > meet later in the afternoon on Sunday (prior to the Monday morning BA > meeting kick-off) to allow as many members to join the meeting as > possible. > > I also agree that a 90-minute meeting would provide us the time to get > some significant work completed. > > How do the members feel about this approach? Please advise. > > Thank you. > > Kind regards, > > RA > > Ron Andruff > RNA Partners > www.rnapartners.com > > From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org > [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf OfJulie Hedlund > Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 15:10 > To: Ron Andruff; Avri Doria > Cc: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org > Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting > > Dear Ron and Avri, > > Staff are beginning to plan working group meetings for the ICANN meeting > in Buenos Aires. If I recall correctly on our call last week SCI members > expressed interest in having a face-to-face meeting in Buenos Aires. We > have typically held SCI meetings at ICANN meetings in the morning or > afternoon on the Sunday of the meeting. In this case that would be > Sunday, 17 November. > > Do you have a preference for a morning or afternoon meeting? Do you have > meetings times you might prefer? I think we should consider scheduling 90 > minutes for a meeting. > > Thank you very much for your assistance. > > Best regards, > > Julie > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From julie.hedlund at icann.org Tue Oct 1 19:16:51 2013 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 12:16:51 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting In-Reply-To: <8ABD79B013D045EB974EEC13BFCBE63A@WUKPC> Message-ID: Wolf-Ulrich, Ron, Avri, et al., Because staff need to be able to block time early for a meeting (and a room), we have tentatively scheduled the SCI meeting for Sunday from 16:30-18:00. By making this request it ensures that we get a space and time on the schedule, but please note that we can shift the time if necessary. Internally we needed to request a room as soon as possible, so that required us to set a placeholder at this time. Please let us know if you wish to change the time of this meeting. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director On 10/1/13 11:54 AM, "WUKnoben" wrote: > >GNSO meetings on Sunday are planned so far until 16:30 - but >1. closed SG meetings are scheduled from 16:30 >2. usually there is a board/GAC meeting scheduled later in the afternoon > >Everyone has to follow her/his preferences. > >Best regards > >Wolf-Ulrich > >-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- >From: Avri Doria >Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 1:14 AM >To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting > > >Hi, > >Meeting Sunday afternoon should be fine as long as it is fit into the >GNSO >Council schedule for that day. Sundays are often rather busy. > >I think a 90 minute meeting might make sense if we can somehow schedule >it >as a way to get this committee back on track. I feel we have lost our >way >over the last few months and need a reset. It would also be useful to >have >an open meeting, which I assume this would be, so that others who might >be >interested in the topics could get involved. > >avri > > > >On 25 Sep 2013, at 19:06, Ron Andruff wrote: > >> Dear Julie and Committee Members, >> >> With all of the new faces on the SCI, and with Charter work to do along >> with the rest of the outstanding issues, I am going to suggest that we >> meet later in the afternoon on Sunday (prior to the Monday morning BA >> meeting kick-off) to allow as many members to join the meeting as >> possible. >> >> I also agree that a 90-minute meeting would provide us the time to get >> some significant work completed. >> >> How do the members feel about this approach? Please advise. >> >> Thank you. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> RA >> >> Ron Andruff >> RNA Partners >> www.rnapartners.com >> >> From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >> [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf OfJulie Hedlund >> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 15:10 >> To: Ron Andruff; Avri Doria >> Cc: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting >> >> Dear Ron and Avri, >> >> Staff are beginning to plan working group meetings for the ICANN >>meeting >> in Buenos Aires. If I recall correctly on our call last week SCI >>members >> expressed interest in having a face-to-face meeting in Buenos Aires. >>We >> have typically held SCI meetings at ICANN meetings in the morning or >> afternoon on the Sunday of the meeting. In this case that would be >> Sunday, 17 November. >> >> Do you have a preference for a morning or afternoon meeting? Do you >>have >> meetings times you might prefer? I think we should consider scheduling >>90 >> minutes for a meeting. >> >> Thank you very much for your assistance. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Julie >> >> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From randruff at rnapartners.com Tue Oct 1 20:07:03 2013 From: randruff at rnapartners.com (Ron Andruff) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 16:07:03 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY - Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting Message-ID: <036001cebee1$cd194ef0$674becd0$@rnapartners.com> Thank you for your input, Wolf-Ulrich. This would suggest that a SCI meeting would be best held 15:00-16:30. If no one is opposed to this, I would ask Julie to please put this in the BA calendar and mark it as an 'open' meeting for any interested party that is on-site who would like to attend. Julie: If we have not heard any disagreement within the coming 48 hours, please go ahead as instructed. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 14:55 To: Avri Doria; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting GNSO meetings on Sunday are planned so far until 16:30 - but 1. closed SG meetings are scheduled from 16:30 2. usually there is a board/GAC meeting scheduled later in the afternoon Everyone has to follow her/his preferences. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- From: Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 1:14 AM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting Hi, Meeting Sunday afternoon should be fine as long as it is fit into the GNSO Council schedule for that day. Sundays are often rather busy. I think a 90 minute meeting might make sense if we can somehow schedule it as a way to get this committee back on track. I feel we have lost our way over the last few months and need a reset. It would also be useful to have an open meeting, which I assume this would be, so that others who might be interested in the topics could get involved. avri On 25 Sep 2013, at 19:06, Ron Andruff wrote: > Dear Julie and Committee Members, > > With all of the new faces on the SCI, and with Charter work to do along > with the rest of the outstanding issues, I am going to suggest that we > meet later in the afternoon on Sunday (prior to the Monday morning BA > meeting kick-off) to allow as many members to join the meeting as > possible. > > I also agree that a 90-minute meeting would provide us the time to get > some significant work completed. > > How do the members feel about this approach? Please advise. > > Thank you. > > Kind regards, > > RA > > Ron Andruff > RNA Partners > www.rnapartners.com > > From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org > [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf OfJulie Hedlund > Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 15:10 > To: Ron Andruff; Avri Doria > Cc: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org > Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting > > Dear Ron and Avri, > > Staff are beginning to plan working group meetings for the ICANN meeting > in Buenos Aires. If I recall correctly on our call last week SCI members > expressed interest in having a face-to-face meeting in Buenos Aires. We > have typically held SCI meetings at ICANN meetings in the morning or > afternoon on the Sunday of the meeting. In this case that would be > Sunday, 17 November. > > Do you have a preference for a morning or afternoon meeting? Do you have > meetings times you might prefer? I think we should consider scheduling 90 > minutes for a meeting. > > Thank you very much for your assistance. > > Best regards, > > Julie > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From julie.hedlund at icann.org Tue Oct 1 20:10:51 2013 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 13:10:51 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY - Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting In-Reply-To: <036001cebee1$cd194ef0$674becd0$@rnapartners.com> Message-ID: Ron, As per a message I sent just a little bit ago to this list, staff had to pick a placeholder time for the meeting because slots are getting taken up. We have tentatively scheduled the SCI meeting for Sunday from 16:30-18:00. We can change this to 15:00-16:30 if people wish, but as you note we'll need to know ASAP -- ideally today. Thanks, Julie On 10/1/13 1:07 PM, "Ron Andruff" wrote: > >Thank you for your input, Wolf-Ulrich. This would suggest that a SCI >meeting would be best held 15:00-16:30. > >If no one is opposed to this, I would ask Julie to please put this in the >BA >calendar and mark it as an 'open' meeting for any interested party that is >on-site who would like to attend. > >Julie: If we have not heard any disagreement within the coming 48 hours, >please go ahead as instructed. > >Kind regards, > >RA > >Ron Andruff >RNA Partners >www.rnapartners.com > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben >Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 14:55 >To: Avri Doria; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting > > >GNSO meetings on Sunday are planned so far until 16:30 - but 1. closed SG >meetings are scheduled from 16:30 2. usually there is a board/GAC meeting >scheduled later in the afternoon > >Everyone has to follow her/his preferences. > >Best regards > >Wolf-Ulrich > >-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- >From: Avri Doria >Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 1:14 AM >To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting > > >Hi, > >Meeting Sunday afternoon should be fine as long as it is fit into the >GNSO >Council schedule for that day. Sundays are often rather busy. > >I think a 90 minute meeting might make sense if we can somehow schedule >it >as a way to get this committee back on track. I feel we have lost our >way >over the last few months and need a reset. It would also be useful to >have >an open meeting, which I assume this would be, so that others who might >be >interested in the topics could get involved. > >avri > > > >On 25 Sep 2013, at 19:06, Ron Andruff wrote: > >> Dear Julie and Committee Members, >> >> With all of the new faces on the SCI, and with Charter work to do along >> with the rest of the outstanding issues, I am going to suggest that we >> meet later in the afternoon on Sunday (prior to the Monday morning BA >> meeting kick-off) to allow as many members to join the meeting as >> possible. >> >> I also agree that a 90-minute meeting would provide us the time to get >> some significant work completed. >> >> How do the members feel about this approach? Please advise. >> >> Thank you. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> RA >> >> Ron Andruff >> RNA Partners >> www.rnapartners.com >> >> From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >> [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf OfJulie Hedlund >> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 15:10 >> To: Ron Andruff; Avri Doria >> Cc: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting >> >> Dear Ron and Avri, >> >> Staff are beginning to plan working group meetings for the ICANN >>meeting >> in Buenos Aires. If I recall correctly on our call last week SCI >>members >> expressed interest in having a face-to-face meeting in Buenos Aires. >>We >> have typically held SCI meetings at ICANN meetings in the morning or >> afternoon on the Sunday of the meeting. In this case that would be >> Sunday, 17 November. >> >> Do you have a preference for a morning or afternoon meeting? Do you >>have >> meetings times you might prefer? I think we should consider scheduling >>90 > >> minutes for a meeting. >> >> Thank you very much for your assistance. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Julie >> >> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mary.wong at icann.org Tue Oct 1 20:30:33 2013 From: mary.wong at icann.org (Mary Wong) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 13:30:33 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY - Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Not that this group needs the reminder, but just a note that if this is to be an open meeting, the 15:00 time will conflict with one of the GNSO Working Sessions (which conclude at 16:30). Cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong at icann.org * One World. One Internet. * -----Original Message----- From: Julie Hedlund Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 1:10 PM To: Ron Andruff , "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY - Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting >Ron, > >As per a message I sent just a little bit ago to this list, staff had to >pick a placeholder time for the meeting because slots are getting taken >up. We have tentatively scheduled the SCI meeting for Sunday from >16:30-18:00. We can change this to 15:00-16:30 if people wish, but as you >note we'll need to know ASAP -- ideally today. > >Thanks, >Julie > > >On 10/1/13 1:07 PM, "Ron Andruff" wrote: > >> >>Thank you for your input, Wolf-Ulrich. This would suggest that a SCI >>meeting would be best held 15:00-16:30. >> >>If no one is opposed to this, I would ask Julie to please put this in the >>BA >>calendar and mark it as an 'open' meeting for any interested party that >>is >>on-site who would like to attend. >> >>Julie: If we have not heard any disagreement within the coming 48 hours, >>please go ahead as instructed. >> >>Kind regards, >> >>RA >> >>Ron Andruff >>RNA Partners >>www.rnapartners.com >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben >>Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 14:55 >>To: Avri Doria; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI >>Meeting >> >> >>GNSO meetings on Sunday are planned so far until 16:30 - but 1. closed SG >>meetings are scheduled from 16:30 2. usually there is a board/GAC meeting >>scheduled later in the afternoon >> >>Everyone has to follow her/his preferences. >> >>Best regards >> >>Wolf-Ulrich >> >>-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- >>From: Avri Doria >>Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 1:14 AM >>To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI >>Meeting >> >> >>Hi, >> >>Meeting Sunday afternoon should be fine as long as it is fit into the >>GNSO >>Council schedule for that day. Sundays are often rather busy. >> >>I think a 90 minute meeting might make sense if we can somehow schedule >>it >>as a way to get this committee back on track. I feel we have lost our >>way >>over the last few months and need a reset. It would also be useful to >>have >>an open meeting, which I assume this would be, so that others who might >>be >>interested in the topics could get involved. >> >>avri >> >> >> >>On 25 Sep 2013, at 19:06, Ron Andruff wrote: >> >>> Dear Julie and Committee Members, >>> >>> With all of the new faces on the SCI, and with Charter work to do along >>> with the rest of the outstanding issues, I am going to suggest that we >>> meet later in the afternoon on Sunday (prior to the Monday morning BA >>> meeting kick-off) to allow as many members to join the meeting as >>> possible. >>> >>> I also agree that a 90-minute meeting would provide us the time to get >>> some significant work completed. >>> >>> How do the members feel about this approach? Please advise. >>> >>> Thank you. >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> RA >>> >>> Ron Andruff >>> RNA Partners >>> www.rnapartners.com >>> >>> From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>> [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf OfJulie >>>Hedlund >>> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 15:10 >>> To: Ron Andruff; Avri Doria >>> Cc: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting >>> >>> Dear Ron and Avri, >>> >>> Staff are beginning to plan working group meetings for the ICANN >>>meeting >>> in Buenos Aires. If I recall correctly on our call last week SCI >>>members >>> expressed interest in having a face-to-face meeting in Buenos Aires. >>>We >>> have typically held SCI meetings at ICANN meetings in the morning or >>> afternoon on the Sunday of the meeting. In this case that would be >>> Sunday, 17 November. >>> >>> Do you have a preference for a morning or afternoon meeting? Do you >>>have >>> meetings times you might prefer? I think we should consider scheduling >>>90 >> >>> minutes for a meeting. >>> >>> Thank you very much for your assistance. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Julie >>> >>> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >> >> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5033 bytes Desc: not available URL: From avri at acm.org Tue Oct 1 20:32:48 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 16:32:48 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, Seems a wise and prudent decision. thanks avri On 1 Oct 2013, at 15:16, Julie Hedlund wrote: > Wolf-Ulrich, Ron, Avri, et al., > > Because staff need to be able to block time early for a meeting (and a > room), we have tentatively scheduled the SCI meeting for Sunday from > 16:30-18:00. By making this request it ensures that we get a space and > time on the schedule, but please note that we can shift the time if > necessary. Internally we needed to request a room as soon as possible, so > that required us to set a placeholder at this time. > > Please let us know if you wish to change the time of this meeting. > > Best regards, > > Julie > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director > > On 10/1/13 11:54 AM, "WUKnoben" wrote: > >> >> GNSO meetings on Sunday are planned so far until 16:30 - but >> 1. closed SG meetings are scheduled from 16:30 >> 2. usually there is a board/GAC meeting scheduled later in the afternoon >> >> Everyone has to follow her/his preferences. >> >> Best regards >> >> Wolf-Ulrich >> >> -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- >> From: Avri Doria >> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 1:14 AM >> To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >> Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting >> >> >> Hi, >> >> Meeting Sunday afternoon should be fine as long as it is fit into the >> GNSO >> Council schedule for that day. Sundays are often rather busy. >> >> I think a 90 minute meeting might make sense if we can somehow schedule >> it >> as a way to get this committee back on track. I feel we have lost our >> way >> over the last few months and need a reset. It would also be useful to >> have >> an open meeting, which I assume this would be, so that others who might >> be >> interested in the topics could get involved. >> >> avri >> >> >> >> On 25 Sep 2013, at 19:06, Ron Andruff wrote: >> >>> Dear Julie and Committee Members, >>> >>> With all of the new faces on the SCI, and with Charter work to do along >>> with the rest of the outstanding issues, I am going to suggest that we >>> meet later in the afternoon on Sunday (prior to the Monday morning BA >>> meeting kick-off) to allow as many members to join the meeting as >>> possible. >>> >>> I also agree that a 90-minute meeting would provide us the time to get >>> some significant work completed. >>> >>> How do the members feel about this approach? Please advise. >>> >>> Thank you. >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> RA >>> >>> Ron Andruff >>> RNA Partners >>> www.rnapartners.com >>> >>> From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>> [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf OfJulie Hedlund >>> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 15:10 >>> To: Ron Andruff; Avri Doria >>> Cc: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting >>> >>> Dear Ron and Avri, >>> >>> Staff are beginning to plan working group meetings for the ICANN >>> meeting >>> in Buenos Aires. If I recall correctly on our call last week SCI >>> members >>> expressed interest in having a face-to-face meeting in Buenos Aires. >>> We >>> have typically held SCI meetings at ICANN meetings in the morning or >>> afternoon on the Sunday of the meeting. In this case that would be >>> Sunday, 17 November. >>> >>> Do you have a preference for a morning or afternoon meeting? Do you >>> have >>> meetings times you might prefer? I think we should consider scheduling >>> 90 >>> minutes for a meeting. >>> >>> Thank you very much for your assistance. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Julie >>> >>> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >> From wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de Tue Oct 1 20:35:39 2013 From: wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de (WUKnoben) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 22:35:39 +0200 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY - Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <87E7647029BE4B5B82A335C96EBA8887@WUKPC> Definitely right, Mary! So far the GAC/GNSO meeting will be at this time. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- From: Mary Wong Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 10:30 PM To: Julie Hedlund ; Ron Andruff ; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY - Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting Not that this group needs the reminder, but just a note that if this is to be an open meeting, the 15:00 time will conflict with one of the GNSO Working Sessions (which conclude at 16:30). Cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong at icann.org * One World. One Internet. * -----Original Message----- From: Julie Hedlund Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 1:10 PM To: Ron Andruff , "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY - Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting >Ron, > >As per a message I sent just a little bit ago to this list, staff had to >pick a placeholder time for the meeting because slots are getting taken >up. We have tentatively scheduled the SCI meeting for Sunday from >16:30-18:00. We can change this to 15:00-16:30 if people wish, but as you >note we'll need to know ASAP -- ideally today. > >Thanks, >Julie > > >On 10/1/13 1:07 PM, "Ron Andruff" wrote: > >> >>Thank you for your input, Wolf-Ulrich. This would suggest that a SCI >>meeting would be best held 15:00-16:30. >> >>If no one is opposed to this, I would ask Julie to please put this in the >>BA >>calendar and mark it as an 'open' meeting for any interested party that >>is >>on-site who would like to attend. >> >>Julie: If we have not heard any disagreement within the coming 48 hours, >>please go ahead as instructed. >> >>Kind regards, >> >>RA >> >>Ron Andruff >>RNA Partners >>www.rnapartners.com >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben >>Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 14:55 >>To: Avri Doria; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI >>Meeting >> >> >>GNSO meetings on Sunday are planned so far until 16:30 - but 1. closed SG >>meetings are scheduled from 16:30 2. usually there is a board/GAC meeting >>scheduled later in the afternoon >> >>Everyone has to follow her/his preferences. >> >>Best regards >> >>Wolf-Ulrich >> >>-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- >>From: Avri Doria >>Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 1:14 AM >>To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI >>Meeting >> >> >>Hi, >> >>Meeting Sunday afternoon should be fine as long as it is fit into the >>GNSO >>Council schedule for that day. Sundays are often rather busy. >> >>I think a 90 minute meeting might make sense if we can somehow schedule >>it >>as a way to get this committee back on track. I feel we have lost our >>way >>over the last few months and need a reset. It would also be useful to >>have >>an open meeting, which I assume this would be, so that others who might >>be >>interested in the topics could get involved. >> >>avri >> >> >> >>On 25 Sep 2013, at 19:06, Ron Andruff wrote: >> >>> Dear Julie and Committee Members, >>> >>> With all of the new faces on the SCI, and with Charter work to do along >>> with the rest of the outstanding issues, I am going to suggest that we >>> meet later in the afternoon on Sunday (prior to the Monday morning BA >>> meeting kick-off) to allow as many members to join the meeting as >>> possible. >>> >>> I also agree that a 90-minute meeting would provide us the time to get >>> some significant work completed. >>> >>> How do the members feel about this approach? Please advise. >>> >>> Thank you. >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> RA >>> >>> Ron Andruff >>> RNA Partners >>> www.rnapartners.com >>> >>> From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>> [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf OfJulie >>>Hedlund >>> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 15:10 >>> To: Ron Andruff; Avri Doria >>> Cc: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting >>> >>> Dear Ron and Avri, >>> >>> Staff are beginning to plan working group meetings for the ICANN >>>meeting >>> in Buenos Aires. If I recall correctly on our call last week SCI >>>members >>> expressed interest in having a face-to-face meeting in Buenos Aires. >>>We >>> have typically held SCI meetings at ICANN meetings in the morning or >>> afternoon on the Sunday of the meeting. In this case that would be >>> Sunday, 17 November. >>> >>> Do you have a preference for a morning or afternoon meeting? Do you >>>have >>> meetings times you might prefer? I think we should consider scheduling >>>90 >> >>> minutes for a meeting. >>> >>> Thank you very much for your assistance. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Julie >>> >>> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >> >> From randruff at rnapartners.com Tue Oct 1 21:00:50 2013 From: randruff at rnapartners.com (Ron Andruff) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 17:00:50 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY - Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting In-Reply-To: <87E7647029BE4B5B82A335C96EBA8887@WUKPC> References: <87E7647029BE4B5B82A335C96EBA8887@WUKPC> Message-ID: <037d01cebee9$51f485c0$f5dd9140$@rnapartners.com> I understood from Wolf's original mail that that GNSO-GAC working session was AFTER 16:30. Now I understand that that session will be in the exact time that I had proposed. I would appreciate confirmation that this understanding is correct. If correct, then the 16:30-18:00 slot would allow those, myself included, to attend the GNSO-GAC session and then come to the SCI meeting. Can we have confirmation that this scheduling is correct? Thank you, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 16:36 To: Mary Wong; Julie Hedlund; Ron Andruff; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY - Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting Definitely right, Mary! So far the GAC/GNSO meeting will be at this time. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- From: Mary Wong Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 10:30 PM To: Julie Hedlund ; Ron Andruff ; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY - Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting Not that this group needs the reminder, but just a note that if this is to be an open meeting, the 15:00 time will conflict with one of the GNSO Working Sessions (which conclude at 16:30). Cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong at icann.org * One World. One Internet. * -----Original Message----- From: Julie Hedlund Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 1:10 PM To: Ron Andruff , "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY - Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting >Ron, > >As per a message I sent just a little bit ago to this list, staff had >to pick a placeholder time for the meeting because slots are getting >taken up. We have tentatively scheduled the SCI meeting for Sunday >from 16:30-18:00. We can change this to 15:00-16:30 if people wish, >but as you note we'll need to know ASAP -- ideally today. > >Thanks, >Julie > > >On 10/1/13 1:07 PM, "Ron Andruff" wrote: > >> >>Thank you for your input, Wolf-Ulrich. This would suggest that a SCI >>meeting would be best held 15:00-16:30. >> >>If no one is opposed to this, I would ask Julie to please put this in >>the BA calendar and mark it as an 'open' meeting for any interested >>party that is on-site who would like to attend. >> >>Julie: If we have not heard any disagreement within the coming 48 >>hours, please go ahead as instructed. >> >>Kind regards, >> >>RA >> >>Ron Andruff >>RNA Partners >>www.rnapartners.com >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben >>Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 14:55 >>To: Avri Doria; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI >>Meeting >> >> >>GNSO meetings on Sunday are planned so far until 16:30 - but 1. closed >>SG meetings are scheduled from 16:30 2. usually there is a board/GAC >>meeting scheduled later in the afternoon >> >>Everyone has to follow her/his preferences. >> >>Best regards >> >>Wolf-Ulrich >> >>-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- >>From: Avri Doria >>Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 1:14 AM >>To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI >>Meeting >> >> >>Hi, >> >>Meeting Sunday afternoon should be fine as long as it is fit into the >>GNSO Council schedule for that day. Sundays are often rather busy. >> >>I think a 90 minute meeting might make sense if we can somehow >>schedule it as a way to get this committee back on track. I feel we >>have lost our way over the last few months and need a reset. It would >>also be useful to have an open meeting, which I assume this would be, >>so that others who might be interested in the topics could get >>involved. >> >>avri >> >> >> >>On 25 Sep 2013, at 19:06, Ron Andruff wrote: >> >>> Dear Julie and Committee Members, >>> >>> With all of the new faces on the SCI, and with Charter work to do >>> along with the rest of the outstanding issues, I am going to suggest >>> that we meet later in the afternoon on Sunday (prior to the Monday >>> morning BA meeting kick-off) to allow as many members to join the >>> meeting as possible. >>> >>> I also agree that a 90-minute meeting would provide us the time to >>> get some significant work completed. >>> >>> How do the members feel about this approach? Please advise. >>> >>> Thank you. >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> RA >>> >>> Ron Andruff >>> RNA Partners >>> www.rnapartners.com >>> >>> From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>> [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf OfJulie >>>Hedlund >>> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 15:10 >>> To: Ron Andruff; Avri Doria >>> Cc: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI >>>Meeting >>> >>> Dear Ron and Avri, >>> >>> Staff are beginning to plan working group meetings for the ICANN >>>meeting in Buenos Aires. If I recall correctly on our call last >>>week SCI members expressed interest in having a face-to-face meeting >>>in Buenos Aires. >>>We >>> have typically held SCI meetings at ICANN meetings in the morning or >>> afternoon on the Sunday of the meeting. In this case that would be >>> Sunday, 17 November. >>> >>> Do you have a preference for a morning or afternoon meeting? Do you >>>have meetings times you might prefer? I think we should consider >>>scheduling >>>90 >> >>> minutes for a meeting. >>> >>> Thank you very much for your assistance. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Julie >>> >>> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >> >> From mary.wong at icann.org Tue Oct 1 21:40:34 2013 From: mary.wong at icann.org (Mary Wong) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 14:40:34 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY - Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting In-Reply-To: <037d01cebee9$51f485c0$f5dd9140$@rnapartners.com> Message-ID: Hi Ron and everyone, As you know ICANN meeting schedules can be somewhat fluid, but yes, my understanding is that the current iteration of the schedule is as you have stated. As such, I would recommend that the SCI plan on having its meeting at 16:30 on Sunday, on the understanding (as Julie has indicated) that if it becomes necessary to change it, we will do our best to ensure this (though do note that this will depend on factors beyond the policy staff's control, such as the timing of the request and room availability at the time.) Cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong at icann.org * One World. One Internet. * -----Original Message----- From: Ron Andruff Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 2:00 PM To: 'WUKnoben' , Mary Wong , Julie Hedlund , "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY - Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting >I understood from Wolf's original mail that that GNSO-GAC working session >was AFTER 16:30. Now I understand that that session will be in the exact >time that I had proposed. I would appreciate confirmation that this >understanding is correct. > >If correct, then the 16:30-18:00 slot would allow those, myself included, >to >attend the GNSO-GAC session and then come to the SCI meeting. > >Can we have confirmation that this scheduling is correct? > >Thank you, > >RA > >Ron Andruff >RNA Partners >www.rnapartners.com > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben >Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 16:36 >To: Mary Wong; Julie Hedlund; Ron Andruff; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND >ACCORDINGLY >- Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting > > >Definitely right, Mary! > >So far the GAC/GNSO meeting will be at this time. > >Best regards > >Wolf-Ulrich > >-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- >From: Mary Wong >Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 10:30 PM >To: Julie Hedlund ; Ron Andruff ; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND >ACCORDINGLY >- Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting > >Not that this group needs the reminder, but just a note that if this is to >be an open meeting, the 15:00 time will conflict with one of the GNSO >Working Sessions (which conclude at 16:30). > >Cheers >Mary > >Mary Wong >Senior Policy Director >Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) >Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 >Email: mary.wong at icann.org > >* One World. One Internet. * > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Julie Hedlund >Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 1:10 PM >To: Ron Andruff , >"gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" >Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND >ACCORDINGLY >- Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting > >>Ron, >> >>As per a message I sent just a little bit ago to this list, staff had >>to pick a placeholder time for the meeting because slots are getting >>taken up. We have tentatively scheduled the SCI meeting for Sunday >>from 16:30-18:00. We can change this to 15:00-16:30 if people wish, >>but as you note we'll need to know ASAP -- ideally today. >> >>Thanks, >>Julie >> >> >>On 10/1/13 1:07 PM, "Ron Andruff" wrote: >> >>> >>>Thank you for your input, Wolf-Ulrich. This would suggest that a SCI >>>meeting would be best held 15:00-16:30. >>> >>>If no one is opposed to this, I would ask Julie to please put this in >>>the BA calendar and mark it as an 'open' meeting for any interested >>>party that is on-site who would like to attend. >>> >>>Julie: If we have not heard any disagreement within the coming 48 >>>hours, please go ahead as instructed. >>> >>>Kind regards, >>> >>>RA >>> >>>Ron Andruff >>>RNA Partners >>>www.rnapartners.com >>> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>>[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben >>>Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 14:55 >>>To: Avri Doria; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>>Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI >>>Meeting >>> >>> >>>GNSO meetings on Sunday are planned so far until 16:30 - but 1. closed >>>SG meetings are scheduled from 16:30 2. usually there is a board/GAC >>>meeting scheduled later in the afternoon >>> >>>Everyone has to follow her/his preferences. >>> >>>Best regards >>> >>>Wolf-Ulrich >>> >>>-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- >>>From: Avri Doria >>>Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 1:14 AM >>>To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>>Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI >>>Meeting >>> >>> >>>Hi, >>> >>>Meeting Sunday afternoon should be fine as long as it is fit into the >>>GNSO Council schedule for that day. Sundays are often rather busy. >>> >>>I think a 90 minute meeting might make sense if we can somehow >>>schedule it as a way to get this committee back on track. I feel we >>>have lost our way over the last few months and need a reset. It would >>>also be useful to have an open meeting, which I assume this would be, >>>so that others who might be interested in the topics could get >>>involved. >>> >>>avri >>> >>> >>> >>>On 25 Sep 2013, at 19:06, Ron Andruff wrote: >>> >>>> Dear Julie and Committee Members, >>>> >>>> With all of the new faces on the SCI, and with Charter work to do >>>> along with the rest of the outstanding issues, I am going to suggest >>>> that we meet later in the afternoon on Sunday (prior to the Monday >>>> morning BA meeting kick-off) to allow as many members to join the >>>> meeting as possible. >>>> >>>> I also agree that a 90-minute meeting would provide us the time to >>>> get some significant work completed. >>>> >>>> How do the members feel about this approach? Please advise. >>>> >>>> Thank you. >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> >>>> RA >>>> >>>> Ron Andruff >>>> RNA Partners >>>> www.rnapartners.com >>>> >>>> From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>>> [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf OfJulie >>>>Hedlund >>>> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 15:10 >>>> To: Ron Andruff; Avri Doria >>>> Cc: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>>> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI >>>>Meeting >>>> >>>> Dear Ron and Avri, >>>> >>>> Staff are beginning to plan working group meetings for the ICANN >>>>meeting in Buenos Aires. If I recall correctly on our call last >>>>week SCI members expressed interest in having a face-to-face meeting >>>>in Buenos Aires. >>>>We >>>> have typically held SCI meetings at ICANN meetings in the morning or >>>> afternoon on the Sunday of the meeting. In this case that would be >>>> Sunday, 17 November. >>>> >>>> Do you have a preference for a morning or afternoon meeting? Do you >>>>have meetings times you might prefer? I think we should consider >>>>scheduling >>>>90 >>> >>>> minutes for a meeting. >>>> >>>> Thank you very much for your assistance. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> Julie >>>> >>>> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >>> >>> > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5033 bytes Desc: not available URL: From randruff at rnapartners.com Tue Oct 1 22:15:16 2013 From: randruff at rnapartners.com (Ron Andruff) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 18:15:16 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY - Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting In-Reply-To: References: <037d01cebee9$51f485c0$f5dd9140$@rnapartners.com> Message-ID: <03ce01cebef3$b84541c0$28cfc540$@rnapartners.com> Thank you, Mary. Let's follow the schedule as planned (16:30-18:00). Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 17:41 To: Ron Andruff; 'WUKnoben'; Julie Hedlund; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY - Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting Hi Ron and everyone, As you know ICANN meeting schedules can be somewhat fluid, but yes, my understanding is that the current iteration of the schedule is as you have stated. As such, I would recommend that the SCI plan on having its meeting at 16:30 on Sunday, on the understanding (as Julie has indicated) that if it becomes necessary to change it, we will do our best to ensure this (though do note that this will depend on factors beyond the policy staff's control, such as the timing of the request and room availability at the time.) Cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong at icann.org * One World. One Internet. * -----Original Message----- From: Ron Andruff Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 2:00 PM To: 'WUKnoben' , Mary Wong , Julie Hedlund , "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY - Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting >I understood from Wolf's original mail that that GNSO-GAC working session >was AFTER 16:30. Now I understand that that session will be in the exact >time that I had proposed. I would appreciate confirmation that this >understanding is correct. > >If correct, then the 16:30-18:00 slot would allow those, myself included, >to >attend the GNSO-GAC session and then come to the SCI meeting. > >Can we have confirmation that this scheduling is correct? > >Thank you, > >RA > >Ron Andruff >RNA Partners >www.rnapartners.com > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben >Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 16:36 >To: Mary Wong; Julie Hedlund; Ron Andruff; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND >ACCORDINGLY >- Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting > > >Definitely right, Mary! > >So far the GAC/GNSO meeting will be at this time. > >Best regards > >Wolf-Ulrich > >-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- >From: Mary Wong >Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 10:30 PM >To: Julie Hedlund ; Ron Andruff ; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND >ACCORDINGLY >- Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting > >Not that this group needs the reminder, but just a note that if this is to >be an open meeting, the 15:00 time will conflict with one of the GNSO >Working Sessions (which conclude at 16:30). > >Cheers >Mary > >Mary Wong >Senior Policy Director >Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) >Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 >Email: mary.wong at icann.org > >* One World. One Internet. * > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Julie Hedlund >Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 1:10 PM >To: Ron Andruff , >"gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" >Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: PLEASE READ AND RESPOND >ACCORDINGLY >- Planning for Buenos Aires SCI Meeting > >>Ron, >> >>As per a message I sent just a little bit ago to this list, staff had >>to pick a placeholder time for the meeting because slots are getting >>taken up. We have tentatively scheduled the SCI meeting for Sunday >>from 16:30-18:00. We can change this to 15:00-16:30 if people wish, >>but as you note we'll need to know ASAP -- ideally today. >> >>Thanks, >>Julie >> >> >>On 10/1/13 1:07 PM, "Ron Andruff" wrote: >> >>> >>>Thank you for your input, Wolf-Ulrich. This would suggest that a SCI >>>meeting would be best held 15:00-16:30. >>> >>>If no one is opposed to this, I would ask Julie to please put this in >>>the BA calendar and mark it as an 'open' meeting for any interested >>>party that is on-site who would like to attend. >>> >>>Julie: If we have not heard any disagreement within the coming 48 >>>hours, please go ahead as instructed. >>> >>>Kind regards, >>> >>>RA >>> >>>Ron Andruff >>>RNA Partners >>>www.rnapartners.com >>> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>>[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben >>>Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 14:55 >>>To: Avri Doria; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>>Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI >>>Meeting >>> >>> >>>GNSO meetings on Sunday are planned so far until 16:30 - but 1. closed >>>SG meetings are scheduled from 16:30 2. usually there is a board/GAC >>>meeting scheduled later in the afternoon >>> >>>Everyone has to follow her/his preferences. >>> >>>Best regards >>> >>>Wolf-Ulrich >>> >>>-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- >>>From: Avri Doria >>>Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 1:14 AM >>>To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>>Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI >>>Meeting >>> >>> >>>Hi, >>> >>>Meeting Sunday afternoon should be fine as long as it is fit into the >>>GNSO Council schedule for that day. Sundays are often rather busy. >>> >>>I think a 90 minute meeting might make sense if we can somehow >>>schedule it as a way to get this committee back on track. I feel we >>>have lost our way over the last few months and need a reset. It would >>>also be useful to have an open meeting, which I assume this would be, >>>so that others who might be interested in the topics could get >>>involved. >>> >>>avri >>> >>> >>> >>>On 25 Sep 2013, at 19:06, Ron Andruff wrote: >>> >>>> Dear Julie and Committee Members, >>>> >>>> With all of the new faces on the SCI, and with Charter work to do >>>> along with the rest of the outstanding issues, I am going to suggest >>>> that we meet later in the afternoon on Sunday (prior to the Monday >>>> morning BA meeting kick-off) to allow as many members to join the >>>> meeting as possible. >>>> >>>> I also agree that a 90-minute meeting would provide us the time to >>>> get some significant work completed. >>>> >>>> How do the members feel about this approach? Please advise. >>>> >>>> Thank you. >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> >>>> RA >>>> >>>> Ron Andruff >>>> RNA Partners >>>> www.rnapartners.com >>>> >>>> From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>>> [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf OfJulie >>>>Hedlund >>>> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 15:10 >>>> To: Ron Andruff; Avri Doria >>>> Cc: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >>>> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Planning for Buenos Aires SCI >>>>Meeting >>>> >>>> Dear Ron and Avri, >>>> >>>> Staff are beginning to plan working group meetings for the ICANN >>>>meeting in Buenos Aires. If I recall correctly on our call last >>>>week SCI members expressed interest in having a face-to-face meeting >>>>in Buenos Aires. >>>>We >>>> have typically held SCI meetings at ICANN meetings in the morning or >>>> afternoon on the Sunday of the meeting. In this case that would be >>>> Sunday, 17 November. >>>> >>>> Do you have a preference for a morning or afternoon meeting? Do you >>>>have meetings times you might prefer? I think we should consider >>>>scheduling >>>>90 >>> >>>> minutes for a meeting. >>>> >>>> Thank you very much for your assistance. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> Julie >>>> >>>> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >>> >>> > From julie.hedlund at icann.org Thu Oct 3 22:25:55 2013 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 15:25:55 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Re: Reminder re: Action: Re-Submitting a Motion In-Reply-To: <3291ED54A36D36449ED57ED8CA77CFD990FCE3B9@lrodcmbx1.lrlaw.com> Message-ID: Hi Anne, Thank you very much for the helpful update. We'll look forward to Greg's report during the call on the 8th. Best regards, Julie From: , Anne Date: Thursday, October 3, 2013 3:23 PM To: Julie Hedlund Cc: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: RE: Reminder re: Action: Re-Submitting a Motion Hi Julie, The draft changes were submitted to IPC Leadership yesterday for review no later than Monday, October 7. So you know, I cannot do the call on Tuesday as I will be travelling and Greg Shatan will be carrying the ball as alternate for this meeting. Greg was copied on the draft changes and will be getting feedback from IPC Leadership prior to the October 8 call. Thank you, Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese, Of Counsel Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP | Suite 700 One South Church Avenue | Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 (T) 520.629.4428 | (F) 520.879.4725 AAikman at LRRLaw.com | www.LRRLaw.com Lewis and Roca LLP is now Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP. From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 2:39 PM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne Cc: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: Reminder re: Action: Re-Submitting a Motion Dear Anne, Thank you very much for your suggestions for changes to the procedure for re-submitting a motion. It would be very helpful if you could consider putting your suggestions in writing, perhaps by providing changes to the existing language. I have included that language below for your reference. Please let me know if I can assist you in any way. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Possible Options for Addressing the Re-Submission of a Motion: Set one or more high-level criteria (in this order): 1) Provide a reasoning to justify the resubmission of a motion. Complete no later than the deadline for submitting a motion: for inclusion on the agenda as soon as possible, but no later than 23h59 Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) on the day, 10 calendar daysbefore the second GNSO Council meeting following the meeting when the motion first was submitted. 2) Publish the text of the re-submitted motion. Complete no later than the deadline for submitting a motion: for inclusion on the agenda as soon as possible, but no later than 23h59 Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) on the day, 10 calendar days before the second GNSO Council meeting following the meeting when the motion first was submitted. 3) Require a seconder of the motion from each house as a prerequisite for placing the re-submission of the motion on the consent agenda. This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. ?2510-2521. In accordance with Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, we advise you that if this message or any attachments contains any tax advice, such tax advice was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 3765 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2055 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Mon Oct 7 15:27:56 2013 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 08:27:56 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] 08 October Meeting Actions Status Message-ID: Dear Ron and SCI members, Below is the status of action items from the meeting on 09 September. I may be a little late joining the meeting tomorrow if an appointment runs late. However, the GNSO Secretariat will be available to start the meeting and run the roll call, and my colleague from ICANN Staff, Lars Hoffmann, also will be on the call. Nonetheless, please see the status report below and I have also posted this into the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/08+October+2013 and entered it into the Adobe Connect room. In addition, I would like to suggest an item for discussion on the agenda. In particular, perhaps the SCI could consider whether to set deadlines to complete its various work products and to assist in completing items perhaps an SCI member could volunteer to lead the work on each item along with a sub-team of a couple of interested members. This was the approach adopted in the past, most notably with SCI charter changes. In addition, staff could assist by providing background material and updating the status of each work product. In addition, the SCI may consider whether it would be helpful to revert to a bi-weekly schedule. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Actions from 09 September Meeting: 1. Resubmitting a motion: Anne Aikman-Scalese volunteered to consider suggesting language. Anne provided the update that the draft changes were submitted to IPC Leadership yesterday for review no later than Monday, October 7. She noted that although she cannot attend the call on 08 October Greg Shatan will be carrying the ball as alternate for that meeting. Greg was copied on the draft changes and will be getting feedback from IPC Leadership prior to the October 8 call. 2 SCI Charter: Consider the changes to the charter and submit a final version to the GNSO Council; the GNSO Council is considering whether to change the decision-making methodology. 3. Working Group Self Assessment: Mickey sent an invite to the WG. He provided an update that the WG currently does not have time to focus on providing comments at this time, but could do so after it completes its current work. 4. Voting my email and possible inclusion of a waiver/exception: Staff will develop a list of how many votes are taken throughout the year and when votes have been held outside of a regularly scheduled GNSO Council meeting. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Mon Oct 7 15:44:50 2013 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 08:44:50 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] CORRECTION re: 08 October Meeting Actions Status In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear SCI members, Note that my reference below to the last meeting should have been to 10 September, not the 9th. Best regards, Julie From: Julie Hedlund Date: Monday, October 7, 2013 11:27 AM To: Ron Andruff , "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Cc: "gnso-secs at icann.org" , Lars Hoffmann , Marika Konings Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] 08 October Meeting Actions Status Dear Ron and SCI members, Below is the status of action items from the meeting on 09 September. I may be a little late joining the meeting tomorrow if an appointment runs late. However, the GNSO Secretariat will be available to start the meeting and run the roll call, and my colleague from ICANN Staff, Lars Hoffmann, also will be on the call. Nonetheless, please see the status report below and I have also posted this into the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/08+October+2013 and entered it into the Adobe Connect room. In addition, I would like to suggest an item for discussion on the agenda. In particular, perhaps the SCI could consider whether to set deadlines to complete its various work products and to assist in completing items perhaps an SCI member could volunteer to lead the work on each item along with a sub-team of a couple of interested members. This was the approach adopted in the past, most notably with SCI charter changes. In addition, staff could assist by providing background material and updating the status of each work product. In addition, the SCI may consider whether it would be helpful to revert to a bi-weekly schedule. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Actions from 09 September Meeting: 1. Resubmitting a motion: Anne Aikman-Scalese volunteered to consider suggesting language. Anne provided the update that the draft changes were submitted to IPC Leadership yesterday for review no later than Monday, October 7. She noted that although she cannot attend the call on 08 October Greg Shatan will be carrying the ball as alternate for that meeting. Greg was copied on the draft changes and will be getting feedback from IPC Leadership prior to the October 8 call. 2 SCI Charter: Consider the changes to the charter and submit a final version to the GNSO Council; the GNSO Council is considering whether to change the decision-making methodology. 3. Working Group Self Assessment: Mickey sent an invite to the WG. He provided an update that the WG currently does not have time to focus on providing comments at this time, but could do so after it completes its current work. 4. Voting my email and possible inclusion of a waiver/exception: Staff will develop a list of how many votes are taken throughout the year and when votes have been held outside of a regularly scheduled GNSO Council meeting. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From randruff at rnapartners.com Tue Oct 8 16:13:22 2013 From: randruff at rnapartners.com (Ron Andruff) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 12:13:22 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Action: SCI Charter In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <002801cec441$512cec60$f386c520$@rnapartners.com> Dear Committee Members, We will be reviewing the current Charter review work to date on our call today and therefore it would serve us all if Members could take a few minutes to review the current status of this document. I have attached it to this mail for easy reference. I look forward to 'seeing' everyone on the call in a few hours. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 16:34 To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Action: SCI Charter Dear SCI members, As discussed on today's SCI call, the GNSO Council determined at its meeting on 05 September that the SCI should submit its suggested changes to its Charter to the Council for consideration. However, these changes would not include modifications of the current language on the decision-making methodology. I have attached the latest version of the Charter. This includes the changes and comments suggested by the Charter Drafting Sub-Team and those suggested during discussions at various SCI meetings. This also is posted in the list of documents for review for the next meeting, which will be on 08 October 2013. See the link at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/08+October+2013. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SCI Charter Revisions - 08 Oct 13.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 22844 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Tue Oct 8 20:54:52 2013 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:54:52 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions: SCI Meeting 08 October 2013 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear SCI members, Please see below the actions from today's SCI meeting. Please let me know if you have any changes. These also are posted to the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/17+November+2013. Our next meeting will be a face-to-face meeting at the ICANN Meeting in Buenos Aires. Staff will send a separate email to determine a date and time. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Actions from 08 October Meeting 1. Resubmitting a motion: Greg Shatan will suggest revised language. 2 SCI Charter: Review final draft charter and indicate whether it is acceptable or needs further revisions by COB Tuesday 15 October; the GNSO Council is considering whether to change the decision-making methodology. 3. Working Group Self Assessment: Staff will identify an alternate Working Group to take the survey and also revise the response form to enable Working Group members to comment also on the survey questions. 4. Voting my email and possible inclusion of a waiver/exception: Staff will develop a list of how many votes are taken throughout the year and when votes have been held outside of a regularly scheduled GNSO Council meeting. 5. SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires: Staff will suggest two alternative meeting times. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Tue Oct 8 20:57:51 2013 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:57:51 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Final Revised SCI Charter Message-ID: Dear SCI members, As discussed on today's call, attached is the final revised SCI Charter in Word and PDF. The changes are accepted and the decision-making process is in brackets with the note that it is under consideration by the GNSO Council. This also is posted on the wiki page at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/16+or+18+November+2013 under the section "For Review." Please respond by COB, Tuesday, 15 October and indicate whether you support this version of the Charter and/or if you have suggested revisions. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SCI Charter Revisions FINAL Draft 08 Oct 2013.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 23452 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SCI Charter Revisions FINAL Draft 08 Oct 2013.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 94885 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julia.charvolen at icann.org Wed Oct 9 07:18:02 2013 From: julia.charvolen at icann.org (Julia Charvolen) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 00:18:02 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] MP3 recording of the SCI meeting - 08 October 2013 Message-ID: Dear All, The next Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation meeting will be held in Buenos Aires in November. Please find the MP3 recording of the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation meeting held on Tuesday, 08 October 2013 at 19:00UTC. http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-sci-20131008-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#oct (transcripts and recording are found on the calendar page) Attendees: James Bladel ? Registrar Stakeholder Group ? Primary Ronald Andruff ? Commercial and Business Users Constituency ? Primary ? Chair Angie Graves - Commercial and Business Users Constituency ? Alternate Wolf-Ulrich Knoben ? ISPCP ? Primary Mikey O?Connor ? ISPCP ? Alternate Avri Doria ? Non Commercial SG ? Primary ? Vice-Chair Amr Elsadr ? NCUC - Alternate Jennifer Wolfe ? NCA - primary Greg Shatan ? IPC - Alternate Apologies: Nuno Garcia ? NCUC ? Alternate Anne Aikman-Scalese ? IPC - Primary Marie Laure Lemineur ? NPOC ICANN Staff: Julie Hedlund Lars Hoffmann Glen de Saint G?ry Julia Charvolen ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Julia Charvolen For GNSO Secretariat Adobe Connect chat transcript 08 October 2013: Ron A:Good day everyone! Just dialing in now. Amr Elsadr:Hi. I'm also dialling in. Mike O'Connor:i think that there are apologies from Anne Aikman-Scalese as well Julia Charvolen:Thank you, apologies noted Mike O'Connor:Greg, can you post the language into the chat? Greg Shatan:Upon the second resubmission of a motion (i.e. the third time the same motion comes before the Council), require a seconder of the motion from each house as a prerequisite for placing the re-submitted motion on the consent agenda. Mike O'Connor:perfecto! thanks Mike O'Connor:i think the time limit is a separate bullet Bladel:Agree. "Motion TTL" Mike O'Connor:but in days, not seconds Bladel:or years. :) Mike O'Connor:+1 6 months Mike O'Connor:me too Mike O'Connor:but soon Mike O'Connor:maybe give Greg one more round of describing why before we move on? Bladel:Put another way: I think we're trying to develop rules that prevent people from being disruptive jerks. Not sure if that is possible. :) Julia Charvolen:Julie Hedlund joined the phone bridge Ron A:@ James: Agreed. Mike O'Connor:if somebody can make me host, i can push it up Mike O'Connor:hang on a sec Greg Shatan:@Mikey Congrats on being made a host! A round of drinks for everybody? Mike O'Connor:woohoo! Mike O'Connor:avri you're muted Amr Elsadr:Since we're not discussing the decision-making issue, I think the rest of the draft looks pretty good. Mike O'Connor:i don't think Glen is monitoring the call. Amr Elsadr:Yes. Oct 31st. Jennifer Wolfe:Sounds like a good plan! Julie Hedlund:@Ron: I take this up as an action item to send a clean version of the charter out to the list today. Ron A:Thank you Julie. Amr Elsadr:Yes we did. :) Amr Elsadr:Thnx. Jennifer Wolfe:I apologize, I have to jump off of Adobe Connect, but will try to dial back in from my mobile. Mike O'Connor:and add Amr's point to that introduction -- Julie Hedlund:@Mickey and @Amr -- I didn't catch Amr's point. Is there some text I can include? Amr Elsadr:@Julie: Some WG members filled in the questionnaire but didn't provide the feedback on the questions. It would be helpful if we could see what they were. There is too large a time-gap between filling them out and now to provide meaningful feedback. Mike O'Connor:thanks Amr Amr Elsadr:Thank YOU, Mikey. :) Mike O'Connor:is that format available somewhere? a form? i've got one to submit Julie Hedlund:@Amr: Thank you, but I think I am confused. It thought we were approaching a new WG with the questionnaire. If so, are you suggesting that we ask at the introduction for people to provide also their feedback on the questions? Amr Elsadr:The questionnaire has been submitted to the "thick" whois pdp wg. Some of the members have already filled it out. It's difficult to fill out the feedback on the questions now though. Too much time has passed. It would be helpful if we have access to the questions that we've already answered for feedback. Mike O'Connor:the trouble is that the questionnaire is in one place, the feedback is in another -- it would be nice to have them side by side when giving feedback on the questionnaire Amr Elsadr:Yeah. That would be nice. Julie Hedlund:@Mickey and Amr -- thank you very much. I will make that suggestion to Ken. Mike O'Connor:that conflicts with the Constituency meetings -- i won't be able to make it Julie Hedlund:@Mickey: Unfortunately we found it was impossible to find a time that didn't conflict. Mike O'Connor:i think almost everybody on this call will be conflicted Mike O'Connor:we're all in Constituencies Wolf Knoben:There are 2 meetings at that time: closed SG meetings and Board/GAC meeting Julie Hedlund:@Mickey: We can try to move the time of the call. We needed to get in a placeholder for the meeting. Greg Shatan:The understanding on the IPC call was that the 4:30-6 time for constituency meetings was not supposed to be encroached. Mike O'Connor:Wolf is in charge of scheduling -- i bet that's why his hand is up Julie Hedlund:@Greg: When we selected that time as a placeholder the constituency meeting hadn't been set. Bladel:Thanks everyone! Mike O'Connor:i bet that it's impossible to open up another time. Mike O'Connor:bye all Amr Elsadr:Thanks. Bye. Wolf Knoben:thanks Julie Hedlund:Thank you everyone! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Thu Oct 10 13:46:33 2013 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 06:46:33 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires Message-ID: Dear Ron, Avri, and SCI members, After conferring with Wolf-Ulrich it seems the only time available that would not conflict with the GNSO Council meetings and that occurs prior to the start of the ICANN meeting on Monday would be early morning Saturday the 16th: 7:30 to 8:45 am (ending to allow 15 minutes before the start of GNSO Council meetings at 9:00 am). Alternatively, we could see if there is a topic during the weekend GNSO Council meetings that is of less interest to SCI members and that thus would allow an overlapping meeting. Please see the draft schedule at: http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/buenos-aires-schedule-07oct13-en.pdf and let me know if there is an alternate time you would like to suggest. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From randruff at rnapartners.com Thu Oct 10 15:15:02 2013 From: randruff at rnapartners.com (Ron Andruff) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 11:15:02 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <023901cec5cb$80709d60$8151d820$@rnapartners.com> Thank you, Julie and Wolf-Ulrich. May I ask the members to confirm whether they can attend the proposed Saturday morning meeting or not? Please hit 'reply all' so that all members can easily see the result. I'll kick things off with my confirmation of attendance. Thank you, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 09:47 To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires Importance: High Dear Ron, Avri, and SCI members, After conferring with Wolf-Ulrich it seems the only time available that would not conflict with the GNSO Council meetings and that occurs prior to the start of the ICANN meeting on Monday would be early morning Saturday the 16th: 7:30 to 8:45 am (ending to allow 15 minutes before the start of GNSO Council meetings at 9:00 am). Alternatively, we could see if there is a topic during the weekend GNSO Council meetings that is of less interest to SCI members and that thus would allow an overlapping meeting. Please see the draft schedule at: http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/buenos-aires-schedule-07oct13-en.pdf and let me know if there is an alternate time you would like to suggest. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mllemineur at gmail.com Thu Oct 10 15:20:19 2013 From: mllemineur at gmail.com (marie-laure Lemineur) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 09:20:19 -0600 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires In-Reply-To: <023901cec5cb$80709d60$8151d820$@rnapartners.com> References: <023901cec5cb$80709d60$8151d820$@rnapartners.com> Message-ID: Dear all, I will be there. Marie-laure Lemineur (NPOC) On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Ron Andruff wrote: > Thank you, Julie and Wolf-Ulrich.**** > > ** ** > > May I ask the members to confirm whether they can attend the proposed > Saturday morning meeting or not? Please hit ?reply all? so that all > members can easily see the result.**** > > ** ** > > I?ll kick things off with my confirmation of attendance.**** > > ** ** > > Thank you,**** > > ** ** > > RA**** > > ** ** > > *Ron Andruff* > > *RNA Partners* > > *www.rnapartners.com * > > ** ** > > *From:* owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto: > owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Julie Hedlund > *Sent:* Thursday, October 10, 2013 09:47 > *To:* gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org > *Cc:* gnso-secs at icann.org > *Subject:* [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires > *Importance:* High**** > > ** ** > > Dear Ron, Avri, and SCI members,**** > > ** ** > > After conferring with Wolf-Ulrich it seems the only time available that > would not conflict with the GNSO Council meetings and that occurs prior to > the start of the ICANN meeting on Monday would be early morning Saturday > the 16th: 7:30 to 8:45 am (ending to allow 15 minutes before the start of > GNSO Council meetings at 9:00 am). Alternatively, we could see if there is > a topic during the weekend GNSO Council meetings that is of less interest > to SCI members and that thus would allow an overlapping meeting. Please > see the draft schedule at: > http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/buenos-aires-schedule-07oct13-en.pdf and > let me know if there is an alternate time you would like to suggest.**** > > ** ** > > Best regards,**** > > ** ** > > Julie**** > > ** ** > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director**** > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mike at haven2.com Thu Oct 10 15:34:21 2013 From: mike at haven2.com (Mike O'Connor) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 10:34:21 -0500 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires In-Reply-To: References: <023901cec5cb$80709d60$8151d820$@rnapartners.com> Message-ID: <2480F11E-5024-47B5-B0B4-8F66C8BD5444@haven2.com> i'm not sure -- there's a series of leadership-development meetings that i'm attending from Wednesday through Saturday (which is causing lots of conflicts for me on Saturday already). i'll try, but i can't confirm. mikey On Oct 10, 2013, at 10:20 AM, marie-laure Lemineur wrote: > Dear all, > > I will be there. > > Marie-laure Lemineur (NPOC) > > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Ron Andruff wrote: > Thank you, Julie and Wolf-Ulrich. > > > > May I ask the members to confirm whether they can attend the proposed Saturday morning meeting or not? Please hit ?reply all? so that all members can easily see the result. > > > > I?ll kick things off with my confirmation of attendance. > > > > Thank you, > > > > RA > > > > Ron Andruff > > RNA Partners > > www.rnapartners.com > > > > From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund > Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 09:47 > To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org > Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org > Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires > Importance: High > > > > Dear Ron, Avri, and SCI members, > > > > After conferring with Wolf-Ulrich it seems the only time available that would not conflict with the GNSO Council meetings and that occurs prior to the start of the ICANN meeting on Monday would be early morning Saturday the 16th: 7:30 to 8:45 am (ending to allow 15 minutes before the start of GNSO Council meetings at 9:00 am). Alternatively, we could see if there is a topic during the weekend GNSO Council meetings that is of less interest to SCI members and that thus would allow an overlapping meeting. Please see the draft schedule at: http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/buenos-aires-schedule-07oct13-en.pdf and let me know if there is an alternate time you would like to suggest. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Julie > > > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director > > PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 3630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de Thu Oct 10 15:58:51 2013 From: wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de (WUKnoben) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 17:58:51 +0200 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires In-Reply-To: <023901cec5cb$80709d60$8151d820$@rnapartners.com> References: <023901cec5cb$80709d60$8151d820$@rnapartners.com> Message-ID: <1D2B9B4F52584566A34A7731ED506285@WUKPC> Yes, I can! Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Ron Andruff Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 5:15 PM To: 'Julie Hedlund' ; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org Subject: RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires Thank you, Julie and Wolf-Ulrich. May I ask the members to confirm whether they can attend the proposed Saturday morning meeting or not? Please hit ?reply all? so that all members can easily see the result. I?ll kick things off with my confirmation of attendance. Thank you, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 09:47 To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires Importance: High Dear Ron, Avri, and SCI members, After conferring with Wolf-Ulrich it seems the only time available that would not conflict with the GNSO Council meetings and that occurs prior to the start of the ICANN meeting on Monday would be early morning Saturday the 16th: 7:30 to 8:45 am (ending to allow 15 minutes before the start of GNSO Council meetings at 9:00 am). Alternatively, we could see if there is a topic during the weekend GNSO Council meetings that is of less interest to SCI members and that thus would allow an overlapping meeting. Please see the draft schedule at: http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/buenos-aires-schedule-07oct13-en.pdf and let me know if there is an alternate time you would like to suggest. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ray at goto.jobs Thu Oct 10 22:42:51 2013 From: ray at goto.jobs (Ray Fassett) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 18:42:51 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires In-Reply-To: <023901cec5cb$80709d60$8151d820$@rnapartners.com> References: <023901cec5cb$80709d60$8151d820$@rnapartners.com> Message-ID: <024801cec60a$0eab8f20$2c02ad60$@goto.jobs> I will not be able to attend due to arriving in Buenos Aires until later that Saturday morning, after 10:30 am local time. Ray From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Ron Andruff Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 11:15 AM To: 'Julie Hedlund'; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org Subject: RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires Importance: High Thank you, Julie and Wolf-Ulrich. May I ask the members to confirm whether they can attend the proposed Saturday morning meeting or not? Please hit 'reply all' so that all members can easily see the result. I'll kick things off with my confirmation of attendance. Thank you, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 09:47 To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires Importance: High Dear Ron, Avri, and SCI members, After conferring with Wolf-Ulrich it seems the only time available that would not conflict with the GNSO Council meetings and that occurs prior to the start of the ICANN meeting on Monday would be early morning Saturday the 16th: 7:30 to 8:45 am (ending to allow 15 minutes before the start of GNSO Council meetings at 9:00 am). Alternatively, we could see if there is a topic during the weekend GNSO Council meetings that is of less interest to SCI members and that thus would allow an overlapping meeting. Please see the draft schedule at: http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/buenos-aires-schedule-07oct13-en.pdf and let me know if there is an alternate time you would like to suggest. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aelsadr at egyptig.org Fri Oct 11 10:47:15 2013 From: aelsadr at egyptig.org (Amr Elsadr) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 12:47:15 +0200 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires In-Reply-To: <023901cec5cb$80709d60$8151d820$@rnapartners.com> References: <023901cec5cb$80709d60$8151d820$@rnapartners.com> Message-ID: If I get my visa in time, I should be able to make it to the meeting. Thanks Ron. Amr On Oct 10, 2013, at 5:15 PM, Ron Andruff wrote: > Thank you, Julie and Wolf-Ulrich. > > May I ask the members to confirm whether they can attend the proposed Saturday morning meeting or not? Please hit ?reply all? so that all members can easily see the result. > > I?ll kick things off with my confirmation of attendance. > > Thank you, > > RA > > Ron Andruff > RNA Partners > www.rnapartners.com > > From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund > Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 09:47 > To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org > Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org > Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires > Importance: High > > Dear Ron, Avri, and SCI members, > > After conferring with Wolf-Ulrich it seems the only time available that would not conflict with the GNSO Council meetings and that occurs prior to the start of the ICANN meeting on Monday would be early morning Saturday the 16th: 7:30 to 8:45 am (ending to allow 15 minutes before the start of GNSO Council meetings at 9:00 am). Alternatively, we could see if there is a topic during the weekend GNSO Council meetings that is of less interest to SCI members and that thus would allow an overlapping meeting. Please see the draft schedule at: http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/buenos-aires-schedule-07oct13-en.pdf and let me know if there is an alternate time you would like to suggest. > > Best regards, > > Julie > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jbladel at godaddy.com Fri Oct 11 17:12:47 2013 From: jbladel at godaddy.com (James M. Bladel) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 17:12:47 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires In-Reply-To: <023901cec5cb$80709d60$8151d820$@rnapartners.com> Message-ID: I should be able to make it. Thanks- J. From: Ron Andruff > Date: Thursday, October 10, 2013 10:15 To: 'Julie Hedlund' >, "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" > Cc: "gnso-secs at icann.org" > Subject: RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires Thank you, Julie and Wolf-Ulrich. May I ask the members to confirm whether they can attend the proposed Saturday morning meeting or not? Please hit 'reply all' so that all members can easily see the result. I'll kick things off with my confirmation of attendance. Thank you, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 09:47 To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires Importance: High Dear Ron, Avri, and SCI members, After conferring with Wolf-Ulrich it seems the only time available that would not conflict with the GNSO Council meetings and that occurs prior to the start of the ICANN meeting on Monday would be early morning Saturday the 16th: 7:30 to 8:45 am (ending to allow 15 minutes before the start of GNSO Council meetings at 9:00 am). Alternatively, we could see if there is a topic during the weekend GNSO Council meetings that is of less interest to SCI members and that thus would allow an overlapping meeting. Please see the draft schedule at: http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/buenos-aires-schedule-07oct13-en.pdf and let me know if there is an alternate time you would like to suggest. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de Tue Oct 15 11:12:46 2013 From: wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de (WUKnoben) Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 13:12:46 +0200 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions: SCI Meeting 08 October 2013 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <12F4EEB3D5554DE59F122127D8F3F41F@WUKPC> Comment re the final charter: Is it clear from the comment on page 2 (Decision making) that the full consensus applies unless the council decides differently? Otherwise it should read: Under consideration by the GNSO Council; applicable so far. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Julie Hedlund Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 10:54 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions: SCI Meeting 08 October 2013 Dear SCI members, Please see below the actions from today's SCI meeting. Please let me know if you have any changes. These also are posted to the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/17+November+2013. Our next meeting will be a face-to-face meeting at the ICANN Meeting in Buenos Aires. Staff will send a separate email to determine a date and time. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Actions from 08 October Meeting 1. Resubmitting a motion: Greg Shatan will suggest revised language. 2 SCI Charter: Review final draft charter and indicate whether it is acceptable or needs further revisions by COB Tuesday 15 October; the GNSO Council is considering whether to change the decision-making methodology. 3. Working Group Self Assessment: Staff will identify an alternate Working Group to take the survey and also revise the response form to enable Working Group members to comment also on the survey questions. 4. Voting my email and possible inclusion of a waiver/exception: Staff will develop a list of how many votes are taken throughout the year and when votes have been held outside of a regularly scheduled GNSO Council meeting. 5. SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires: Staff will suggest two alternative meeting times. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From randruff at rnapartners.com Tue Oct 15 13:24:50 2013 From: randruff at rnapartners.com (Ron Andruff) Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:24:50 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions: SCI Meeting 08 October 2013 In-Reply-To: <12F4EEB3D5554DE59F122127D8F3F41F@WUKPC> References: <12F4EEB3D5554DE59F122127D8F3F41F@WUKPC> Message-ID: <006c01cec9a9$f18c8fe0$d4a5afa0$@rnapartners.com> Thanks for your comment, Wolf-Ulrich. Indeed, I am addressing this specific aspect in the cover letter to Jonathan (GNSO Council Chair). Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 07:13 To: Julie Hedlund; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions: SCI Meeting 08 October 2013 Comment re the final charter: Is it clear from the comment on page 2 (Decision making) that the full consensus applies unless the council decides differently? Otherwise it should read: Under consideration by the GNSO Council; applicable so far. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Julie Hedlund Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 10:54 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions: SCI Meeting 08 October 2013 Dear SCI members, Please see below the actions from today's SCI meeting. Please let me know if you have any changes. These also are posted to the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/17+November+2013. Our next meeting will be a face-to-face meeting at the ICANN Meeting in Buenos Aires. Staff will send a separate email to determine a date and time. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Actions from 08 October Meeting 1. Resubmitting a motion: Greg Shatan will suggest revised language. 2 SCI Charter: Review final draft charter and indicate whether it is acceptable or needs further revisions by COB Tuesday 15 October; the GNSO Council is considering whether to change the decision-making methodology. 3. Working Group Self Assessment: Staff will identify an alternate Working Group to take the survey and also revise the response form to enable Working Group members to comment also on the survey questions. 4. Voting my email and possible inclusion of a waiver/exception: Staff will develop a list of how many votes are taken throughout the year and when votes have been held outside of a regularly scheduled GNSO Council meeting. 5. SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires: Staff will suggest two alternative meeting times. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From randruff at rnapartners.com Tue Oct 15 13:32:01 2013 From: randruff at rnapartners.com (Ron Andruff) Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:32:01 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: SCI Charter Revisions References: <002d01cea7b0$456f0730$d04d1590$@rnapartners.com> <018f01ceadac$1f749fc0$5e5ddf40$@afilias.info> Message-ID: <007701cec9aa$f2b2f200$d818d600$@rnapartners.com> Dear Jonathan, As I noted below the SCI took up discussion of the charter revisions based on the guidance provided by you and the Council in your message below. Accordingly, the SCI has revised the charter per the guidance as follows: 1. It confirms that the SCI is a standing committee and; 2. It includes other changes the SCI deemed necessary including updating it to reflect the current role of the SCI and to include procedures for Chair and Vice Chair elections and; 3. It includes the original text concerning the decision-making methodology and a note that the methodology is under consideration by the GNSO Council. The SCI awaits Council's final determination in this regard. Please let me know if you or the Councilors have questions concerning the modified charter or need additional information. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: Ron Andruff [mailto:randruff at rnapartners.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 09:07 To: 'jrobinson at afilias.info' Cc: 'council at gnso.icann.org'; 'gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org' Subject: RE: SCI Charter Revisions Dear Jonathan, Thank you and the GNSO Council for providing the SCI with this way forward. We will pick this up on our regularly scheduled call today. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info] Sent: Monday, September 9, 2013 18:30 To: 'Ron Andruff' Cc: council at gnso.icann.org Subject: RE: SCI Charter Revisions Dear Ron, Thank-you again for this letter. As you will no doubt by now be aware, the Council did discuss the SCI and the important questions you have raised in your communication below. Essentially the Council agreed the following: 1. That the Charter of the SCI should be modified to confirm that the SCI is a standing committee and; 2. That the Council would like the SCI to undertake the work to propose the above and any other changes it deems necessary and then to submit these to the Council and; 3. That the SCI should not propose to modify the decision making methodology (away from full consensus) as the GNSO Council will consider this particular issue further. Noting: That should the decision be made to move from full consensus in future, that should be a decision for the GNSO Council. I trust that you will find this response and the associated guidance helpful. In addition, please could you convey my thanks on behalf of the Council to the SCI for their work to date and on-going contribution. Best wishes, Jonathan Jonathan Robinson Chair ICANN GNSO Council jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com Tel: +44 (0)20 7993 6103 skype: jonathan.m.r From: Ron Andruff [mailto:randruff at rnapartners.com] Sent: 02 September 2013 03:44 To: jrobinson at afilias.info ; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: SCI Charter Revisions Importance: High Dear Jonathan, I understand that the GNSO Council will be discussing the SCI Charter revisions on its next call scheduled for September 5th, 2013. At its meeting on August 6th, 2013, the SCI members discussed the outcomes from the GNSO Sessions in Durban on this matter and decided that it would be helpful to more formally seek guidance from the Council with respect to the next steps for the SCI Charter. One aspect, in particular, based on the discussion in Durban, seems clear, i.e. that the GNSO Council would like the SCI to continue as a 'standing committee'. We would like the Charter to reflect that, should that indeed be the case. (I refer you to the email on this topic that I sent you on 08 July 2013, just prior to Durban.) At the Wrap-Up Session the GNSO Council also discussed the SCI process for decision-making ('full consensus' versus Standard Methodology for Making Decisions). The SCI understands that the Council agreed to consider this issue further on its mailing list and Council members were encouraged to share their views in support of one or the other option. We now understand that Jeff Neuman will provide background information as to why the SCI was initially required to operate under full consensus. At the SCI's August 6th meeting and since then on our mailing list, members expressed an interest in helping guide the discussion for the Council as to why SCI members feel there should or should not be full consensus. The impetus behind the recommendation to reconsider using "full or unanimous consensus" or "rough or near consensus" came from my request, as in-coming SCI Chair, to review and update the SCI Charter, as well as the SCI Wiki since the Committee now had over two years of experience behind it and the language in both the document and on the Wiki was outdated. I also noted at the time, and do so here again for Council's edification, the SCI Charter is further governed by the GNSO Working Group Guidelines. The response within the SCI came in two forms: Those that feel that being forced to come to unanimous consensus "improves our product" because it ensures that the Committee dedicates the time to explore all points of view and works to find stronger outcomes; the arguments against full consensus included concerns about potentially using the SCI in a way that would drive substantive outcomes in the GNSO, whether intentionally or not, by pushing through decisions on procedure/process to meet an immediate need, or that any member choosing to remain steadfast in opposition could capture the SCI process. All SCI members however respect that balanced discussions result in consensus - in some form - leading to better appreciation of each member's contributions, more confidence in the Committee itself and in the process. The SCI has the luxury of not having to work under any time constraints on procedural and process issues (rather than substantive issues). Within the Standard Methodology for Making Decisions and the five forms of consent defined in the Guidelines, 'rough or near consent' (defined as "a position where only a small minority disagrees, but most agree") immediately follows 'full or unanimous consent'. We are all aware of the ramifications of full consensus, having worked under this standard since ICANN's inception. 'Near consensus', provides the basis for Committee members to argue for their respective stakeholder group's position, while it also provides for written rationale entered into the public record for any and all dissenting opinion(s), thus providing more context to the GNSO Council to assist it in coming to its own determinations. Notably, the SCI does not make any determinations other than to propose recommendations to the GNSO Council, which it, in turn, discusses, accepts, modifies or rejects, as Council deems appropriate. On behalf of the SCI, we hope that this background information will inform your discussions, however the SCI would be happy to further brief the Council on the Charter and consensus issues, if so requested. We would also be grateful to know as soon as possible if the Council, as the Chartering organization, would prefer to take on the task of revising the SCI Charter or pass that responsibility to the SCI once it has made its determination on the consensus issue. The SCI stands ready to assist in this task in whichever way the Council deems appropriate. We await your guidance. Kind regards, Ron Andruff SCI Chair Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SCI Charter Revisions FINAL Draft 08 Oct 2013.pdf Type: application/octet-stream Size: 94886 bytes Desc: not available URL: From randruff at rnapartners.com Tue Oct 15 13:37:26 2013 From: randruff at rnapartners.com (Ron Andruff) Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:37:26 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <008901cec9ab$b489e690$1d9db3b0$@rnapartners.com> Dear fellow Committee Members, We have heard from many of you that the Saturday morning, Nov. 16th meeting slot is acceptable, so I would like to confirm that we will indeed hold our face-to-face meeting in Buenos Aires at 07:30-08:45 on that day. Looking forward to seeing all who can be in attendance then. Julie, we'll leave it to you to work with the Secretariat to organize and advise of which meeting room we will be in and to provide for a bridge for those who may not be attending the BA meeting, but would like to dial in. Thanks everyone! Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 09:47 To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting in Buenos Aires Importance: High Dear Ron, Avri, and SCI members, After conferring with Wolf-Ulrich it seems the only time available that would not conflict with the GNSO Council meetings and that occurs prior to the start of the ICANN meeting on Monday would be early morning Saturday the 16th: 7:30 to 8:45 am (ending to allow 15 minutes before the start of GNSO Council meetings at 9:00 am). Alternatively, we could see if there is a topic during the weekend GNSO Council meetings that is of less interest to SCI members and that thus would allow an overlapping meeting. Please see the draft schedule at: http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/buenos-aires-schedule-07oct13-en.pdf and let me know if there is an alternate time you would like to suggest. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Fri Oct 18 13:30:37 2013 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 06:30:37 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: SCI Charter Revisions In-Reply-To: <007701cec9aa$f2b2f200$d818d600$@rnapartners.com> Message-ID: Dear Ron and SCI members, Wolf-Ulrich has agreed to submit the attached motion for consideration by the Council at its meeting on 31 October for approval of the charter. At its meeting the Council also will discuss the decision-making methodology, so it is possible that the Council may revise the charter prior to its approval. I will update you on 31 October as to the outcome of the discussion, and whether the charter is revised and/or approved. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: Ron Andruff Date: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:32 AM To: "jrobinson at afilias.info" Cc: "council at gnso.icann.org" , "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: SCI Charter Revisions Dear Jonathan, As I noted below the SCI took up discussion of the charter revisions based on the guidance provided by you and the Council in your message below. Accordingly, the SCI has revised the charter per the guidance as follows: 1. It confirms that the SCI is a standing committee and; 2. It includes other changes the SCI deemed necessary including updating it to reflect the current role of the SCI and to include procedures for Chair and Vice Chair elections and; 3. It includes the original text concerning the decision-making methodology and a note that the methodology is under consideration by the GNSO Council. The SCI awaits Council?s final determination in this regard. Please let me know if you or the Councilors have questions concerning the modified charter or need additional information. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: Ron Andruff [mailto:randruff at rnapartners.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 09:07 To: 'jrobinson at afilias.info' Cc: 'council at gnso.icann.org'; 'gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org' Subject: RE: SCI Charter Revisions Dear Jonathan, Thank you and the GNSO Council for providing the SCI with this way forward. We will pick this up on our regularly scheduled call today. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info] Sent: Monday, September 9, 2013 18:30 To: 'Ron Andruff' Cc: council at gnso.icann.org Subject: RE: SCI Charter Revisions Dear Ron, Thank-you again for this letter. As you will no doubt by now be aware, the Council did discuss the SCI and the important questions you have raised in your communication below. Essentially the Council agreed the following: 1. That the Charter of the SCI should be modified to confirm that the SCI is a standing committee and; > 1. That the Council would like the SCI to undertake the work to propose the > above and any other changes it deems necessary and then to submit these to the > Council and; > 2. That the SCI should not propose to modify the decision making methodology > (away from full consensus) as the GNSO Council will consider this particular > issue further. > 3. Noting: That should the decision be made to move from full consensus in > future, that should be a decision for the GNSO Council. I trust that you will find this response and the associated guidance helpful. In addition, please could you convey my thanks on behalf of the Council to the SCI for their work to date and on-going contribution. Best wishes, Jonathan Jonathan Robinson Chair ICANN GNSO Council jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com Tel: +44 (0)20 7993 6103 skype: jonathan.m.r From: Ron Andruff [mailto:randruff at rnapartners.com] Sent: 02 September 2013 03:44 To: jrobinson at afilias.info; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: SCI Charter Revisions Importance: High Dear Jonathan, I understand that the GNSO Council will be discussing the SCI Charter revisions on its next call scheduled for September 5th, 2013. At its meeting on August 6th, 2013, the SCI members discussed the outcomes from the GNSO Sessions in Durban on this matter and decided that it would be helpful to more formally seek guidance from the Council with respect to the next steps for the SCI Charter. One aspect, in particular, based on the discussion in Durban, seems clear, i.e. that the GNSO Council would like the SCI to continue as a 'standing committee'. We would like the Charter to reflect that, should that indeed be the case. (I refer you to the email on this topic that I sent you on 08 July 2013, just prior to Durban.) At the Wrap-Up Session the GNSO Council also discussed the SCI process for decision-making (?full consensus? versus Standard Methodology for Making Decisions). The SCI understands that the Council agreed to consider this issue further on its mailing list and Council members were encouraged to share their views in support of one or the other option. We now understand that Jeff Neuman will provide background information as to why the SCI was initially required to operate under full consensus. At the SCI?s August 6th meeting and since then on our mailing list, members expressed an interest in helping guide the discussion for the Council as to why SCI members feel there should or should not be full consensus. The impetus behind the recommendation to reconsider using ?full or unanimous consensus? or ?rough or near consensus? came from my request, as in-coming SCI Chair, to review and update the SCI Charter, as well as the SCI Wiki since the Committee now had over two years of experience behind it and the language in both the document and on the Wiki was outdated. I also noted at the time, and do so here again for Council?s edification, the SCI Charter is further governed by the GNSO Working Group Guidelines. The response within the SCI came in two forms: Those that feel that being forced to come to unanimous consensus ?improves our product? because it ensures that the Committee dedicates the time to explore all points of view and works to find stronger outcomes; the arguments against full consensus included concerns about potentially using the SCI in a way that would drive substantive outcomes in the GNSO, whether intentionally or not, by pushing through decisions on procedure/process to meet an immediate need, or that any member choosing to remain steadfast in opposition could capture the SCI process. All SCI members however respect that balanced discussions result in consensus ? in some form ? leading to better appreciation of each member?s contributions, more confidence in the Committee itself and in the process. The SCI has the luxury of not having to work under any time constraints on procedural and process issues (rather than substantive issues). Within the Standard Methodology for Making Decisions and the five forms of consent defined in the Guidelines, ?rough or near consent? (defined as ?a position where only a small minority disagrees, but most agree?) immediately follows ?full or unanimous consent?. We are all aware of the ramifications of full consensus, having worked under this standard since ICANN?s inception. ?Near consensus?, provides the basis for Committee members to argue for their respective stakeholder group?s position, while it also provides for written rationale entered into the public record for any and all dissenting opinion(s), thus providing more context to the GNSO Council to assist it in coming to its own determinations. Notably, the SCI does not make any determinations other than to propose recommendations to the GNSO Council, which it, in turn, discusses, accepts, modifies or rejects, as Council deems appropriate. On behalf of the SCI, we hope that this background information will inform your discussions, however the SCI would be happy to further brief the Council on the Charter and consensus issues, if so requested. We would also be grateful to know as soon as possible if the Council, as the Chartering organization, would prefer to take on the task of revising the SCI Charter or pass that responsibility to the SCI once it has made its determination on the consensus issue. The SCI stands ready to assist in this task in whichever way the Council deems appropriate. We await your guidance. Kind regards, Ron Andruff SCI Chair Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Oct 17 Motion for Approval of a Revised Charter Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation.doc Type: application/msword Size: 27136 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From randruff at rnapartners.com Fri Oct 18 14:51:51 2013 From: randruff at rnapartners.com (Ron Andruff) Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 10:51:51 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: SCI Charter Revisions In-Reply-To: References: <007701cec9aa$f2b2f200$d818d600$@rnapartners.com> Message-ID: <002d01cecc11$97f8ac10$c7ea0430$@rnapartners.com> Thank you, Julie, Wolf-Ulrich, Having reviewed the motion, it appears to be in order with one caveat; I believe that it is imperative that the GNSO Council come to a final determination on the decision-making methodology before the motion is introduced. That may well be the intention and your understanding, but I did want to flag that for clarity. No point in voting on a 'half-baked cake', as it were. The SCI looks forward to hearing the outcome of the Council October 31st meeting. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 09:31 To: Ron Andruff; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: SCI Charter Revisions Dear Ron and SCI members, Wolf-Ulrich has agreed to submit the attached motion for consideration by the Council at its meeting on 31 October for approval of the charter. At its meeting the Council also will discuss the decision-making methodology, so it is possible that the Council may revise the charter prior to its approval. I will update you on 31 October as to the outcome of the discussion, and whether the charter is revised and/or approved. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: Ron Andruff > Date: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:32 AM To: "jrobinson at afilias.info " > Cc: "council at gnso.icann.org " >, "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org " > Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: SCI Charter Revisions Dear Jonathan, As I noted below the SCI took up discussion of the charter revisions based on the guidance provided by you and the Council in your message below. Accordingly, the SCI has revised the charter per the guidance as follows: 1. It confirms that the SCI is a standing committee and; 2. It includes other changes the SCI deemed necessary including updating it to reflect the current role of the SCI and to include procedures for Chair and Vice Chair elections and; 3. It includes the original text concerning the decision-making methodology and a note that the methodology is under consideration by the GNSO Council. The SCI awaits Council's final determination in this regard. Please let me know if you or the Councilors have questions concerning the modified charter or need additional information. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: Ron Andruff [mailto:randruff at rnapartners.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 09:07 To: 'jrobinson at afilias.info ' Cc: 'council at gnso.icann.org '; 'gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org ' Subject: RE: SCI Charter Revisions Dear Jonathan, Thank you and the GNSO Council for providing the SCI with this way forward. We will pick this up on our regularly scheduled call today. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info] Sent: Monday, September 9, 2013 18:30 To: 'Ron Andruff' Cc: council at gnso.icann.org Subject: RE: SCI Charter Revisions Dear Ron, Thank-you again for this letter. As you will no doubt by now be aware, the Council did discuss the SCI and the important questions you have raised in your communication below. Essentially the Council agreed the following: 1. That the Charter of the SCI should be modified to confirm that the SCI is a standing committee and; 2. That the Council would like the SCI to undertake the work to propose the above and any other changes it deems necessary and then to submit these to the Council and; 3. That the SCI should not propose to modify the decision making methodology (away from full consensus) as the GNSO Council will consider this particular issue further. Noting: That should the decision be made to move from full consensus in future, that should be a decision for the GNSO Council. I trust that you will find this response and the associated guidance helpful. In addition, please could you convey my thanks on behalf of the Council to the SCI for their work to date and on-going contribution. Best wishes, Jonathan Jonathan Robinson Chair ICANN GNSO Council jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com Tel: +44 (0)20 7993 6103 skype: jonathan.m.r From: Ron Andruff [mailto:randruff at rnapartners.com] Sent: 02 September 2013 03:44 To: jrobinson at afilias.info ; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: SCI Charter Revisions Importance: High Dear Jonathan, I understand that the GNSO Council will be discussing the SCI Charter revisions on its next call scheduled for September 5th, 2013. At its meeting on August 6th, 2013, the SCI members discussed the outcomes from the GNSO Sessions in Durban on this matter and decided that it would be helpful to more formally seek guidance from the Council with respect to the next steps for the SCI Charter. One aspect, in particular, based on the discussion in Durban, seems clear, i.e. that the GNSO Council would like the SCI to continue as a 'standing committee'. We would like the Charter to reflect that, should that indeed be the case. (I refer you to the email on this topic that I sent you on 08 July 2013, just prior to Durban.) At the Wrap-Up Session the GNSO Council also discussed the SCI process for decision-making ('full consensus' versus Standard Methodology for Making Decisions). The SCI understands that the Council agreed to consider this issue further on its mailing list and Council members were encouraged to share their views in support of one or the other option. We now understand that Jeff Neuman will provide background information as to why the SCI was initially required to operate under full consensus. At the SCI's August 6th meeting and since then on our mailing list, members expressed an interest in helping guide the discussion for the Council as to why SCI members feel there should or should not be full consensus. The impetus behind the recommendation to reconsider using "full or unanimous consensus" or "rough or near consensus" came from my request, as in-coming SCI Chair, to review and update the SCI Charter, as well as the SCI Wiki since the Committee now had over two years of experience behind it and the language in both the document and on the Wiki was outdated. I also noted at the time, and do so here again for Council's edification, the SCI Charter is further governed by the GNSO Working Group Guidelines. The response within the SCI came in two forms: Those that feel that being forced to come to unanimous consensus "improves our product" because it ensures that the Committee dedicates the time to explore all points of view and works to find stronger outcomes; the arguments against full consensus included concerns about potentially using the SCI in a way that would drive substantive outcomes in the GNSO, whether intentionally or not, by pushing through decisions on procedure/process to meet an immediate need, or that any member choosing to remain steadfast in opposition could capture the SCI process. All SCI members however respect that balanced discussions result in consensus - in some form - leading to better appreciation of each member's contributions, more confidence in the Committee itself and in the process. The SCI has the luxury of not having to work under any time constraints on procedural and process issues (rather than substantive issues). Within the Standard Methodology for Making Decisions and the five forms of consent defined in the Guidelines, 'rough or near consent' (defined as "a position where only a small minority disagrees, but most agree") immediately follows 'full or unanimous consent'. We are all aware of the ramifications of full consensus, having worked under this standard since ICANN's inception. 'Near consensus', provides the basis for Committee members to argue for their respective stakeholder group's position, while it also provides for written rationale entered into the public record for any and all dissenting opinion(s), thus providing more context to the GNSO Council to assist it in coming to its own determinations. Notably, the SCI does not make any determinations other than to propose recommendations to the GNSO Council, which it, in turn, discusses, accepts, modifies or rejects, as Council deems appropriate. On behalf of the SCI, we hope that this background information will inform your discussions, however the SCI would be happy to further brief the Council on the Charter and consensus issues, if so requested. We would also be grateful to know as soon as possible if the Council, as the Chartering organization, would prefer to take on the task of revising the SCI Charter or pass that responsibility to the SCI once it has made its determination on the consensus issue. The SCI stands ready to assist in this task in whichever way the Council deems appropriate. We await your guidance. Kind regards, Ron Andruff SCI Chair Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Fri Oct 18 14:57:10 2013 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 07:57:10 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: SCI Charter Revisions In-Reply-To: <002d01cecc11$97f8ac10$c7ea0430$@rnapartners.com> Message-ID: Ron, In order for the motion to be on the table for the meeting on the 31st it must be submitted by Monday the 21st. This does not preclude, however, the Council from having the discussion on the methodology at the meeting on the 31st. It just means that if the Council agrees on the methodology in its discussion on the 31st it will also be able to approve the charter (revised or not) also during that meeting. The Charter can be revised (if necessary) following that discussion and submitted for approval during the same meeting. If the motion is not submitted by the motion deadline then the Council would not be able to approve the charter on the 31st, but would have to wait until the next meeting (Buenos Aires) to do so. Best regards, Julie From: Ron Andruff Date: Friday, October 18, 2013 10:51 AM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Cc: Julie Hedlund Subject: RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: SCI Charter Revisions Thank you, Julie, Wolf-Ulrich, Having reviewed the motion, it appears to be in order with one caveat; I believe that it is imperative that the GNSO Council come to a final determination on the decision-making methodology before the motion is introduced. That may well be the intention and your understanding, but I did want to flag that for clarity. No point in voting on a ?half-baked cake?, as it were. The SCI looks forward to hearing the outcome of the Council October 31st meeting. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 09:31 To: Ron Andruff; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: SCI Charter Revisions Dear Ron and SCI members, Wolf-Ulrich has agreed to submit the attached motion for consideration by the Council at its meeting on 31 October for approval of the charter. At its meeting the Council also will discuss the decision-making methodology, so it is possible that the Council may revise the charter prior to its approval. I will update you on 31 October as to the outcome of the discussion, and whether the charter is revised and/or approved. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: Ron Andruff Date: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:32 AM To: "jrobinson at afilias.info" Cc: "council at gnso.icann.org" , "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: SCI Charter Revisions Dear Jonathan, As I noted below the SCI took up discussion of the charter revisions based on the guidance provided by you and the Council in your message below. Accordingly, the SCI has revised the charter per the guidance as follows: 1. It confirms that the SCI is a standing committee and; 2. It includes other changes the SCI deemed necessary including updating it to reflect the current role of the SCI and to include procedures for Chair and Vice Chair elections and; 3. It includes the original text concerning the decision-making methodology and a note that the methodology is under consideration by the GNSO Council. The SCI awaits Council?s final determination in this regard. Please let me know if you or the Councilors have questions concerning the modified charter or need additional information. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: Ron Andruff [mailto:randruff at rnapartners.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 09:07 To: 'jrobinson at afilias.info' Cc: 'council at gnso.icann.org'; 'gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org' Subject: RE: SCI Charter Revisions Dear Jonathan, Thank you and the GNSO Council for providing the SCI with this way forward. We will pick this up on our regularly scheduled call today. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info] Sent: Monday, September 9, 2013 18:30 To: 'Ron Andruff' Cc: council at gnso.icann.org Subject: RE: SCI Charter Revisions Dear Ron, Thank-you again for this letter. As you will no doubt by now be aware, the Council did discuss the SCI and the important questions you have raised in your communication below. Essentially the Council agreed the following: 1. That the Charter of the SCI should be modified to confirm that the SCI is a standing committee and; > 1. That the Council would like the SCI to undertake the work to propose the > above and any other changes it deems necessary and then to submit these to the > Council and; > 2. That the SCI should not propose to modify the decision making methodology > (away from full consensus) as the GNSO Council will consider this particular > issue further. > 3. Noting: That should the decision be made to move from full consensus in > future, that should be a decision for the GNSO Council. I trust that you will find this response and the associated guidance helpful. In addition, please could you convey my thanks on behalf of the Council to the SCI for their work to date and on-going contribution. Best wishes, Jonathan Jonathan Robinson Chair ICANN GNSO Council jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com Tel: +44 (0)20 7993 6103 skype: jonathan.m.r From: Ron Andruff [mailto:randruff at rnapartners.com] Sent: 02 September 2013 03:44 To: jrobinson at afilias.info; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: SCI Charter Revisions Importance: High Dear Jonathan, I understand that the GNSO Council will be discussing the SCI Charter revisions on its next call scheduled for September 5th, 2013. At its meeting on August 6th, 2013, the SCI members discussed the outcomes from the GNSO Sessions in Durban on this matter and decided that it would be helpful to more formally seek guidance from the Council with respect to the next steps for the SCI Charter. One aspect, in particular, based on the discussion in Durban, seems clear, i.e. that the GNSO Council would like the SCI to continue as a 'standing committee'. We would like the Charter to reflect that, should that indeed be the case. (I refer you to the email on this topic that I sent you on 08 July 2013, just prior to Durban.) At the Wrap-Up Session the GNSO Council also discussed the SCI process for decision-making (?full consensus? versus Standard Methodology for Making Decisions). The SCI understands that the Council agreed to consider this issue further on its mailing list and Council members were encouraged to share their views in support of one or the other option. We now understand that Jeff Neuman will provide background information as to why the SCI was initially required to operate under full consensus. At the SCI?s August 6th meeting and since then on our mailing list, members expressed an interest in helping guide the discussion for the Council as to why SCI members feel there should or should not be full consensus. The impetus behind the recommendation to reconsider using ?full or unanimous consensus? or ?rough or near consensus? came from my request, as in-coming SCI Chair, to review and update the SCI Charter, as well as the SCI Wiki since the Committee now had over two years of experience behind it and the language in both the document and on the Wiki was outdated. I also noted at the time, and do so here again for Council?s edification, the SCI Charter is further governed by the GNSO Working Group Guidelines. The response within the SCI came in two forms: Those that feel that being forced to come to unanimous consensus ?improves our product? because it ensures that the Committee dedicates the time to explore all points of view and works to find stronger outcomes; the arguments against full consensus included concerns about potentially using the SCI in a way that would drive substantive outcomes in the GNSO, whether intentionally or not, by pushing through decisions on procedure/process to meet an immediate need, or that any member choosing to remain steadfast in opposition could capture the SCI process. All SCI members however respect that balanced discussions result in consensus ? in some form ? leading to better appreciation of each member?s contributions, more confidence in the Committee itself and in the process. The SCI has the luxury of not having to work under any time constraints on procedural and process issues (rather than substantive issues). Within the Standard Methodology for Making Decisions and the five forms of consent defined in the Guidelines, ?rough or near consent? (defined as ?a position where only a small minority disagrees, but most agree?) immediately follows ?full or unanimous consent?. We are all aware of the ramifications of full consensus, having worked under this standard since ICANN?s inception. ?Near consensus?, provides the basis for Committee members to argue for their respective stakeholder group?s position, while it also provides for written rationale entered into the public record for any and all dissenting opinion(s), thus providing more context to the GNSO Council to assist it in coming to its own determinations. Notably, the SCI does not make any determinations other than to propose recommendations to the GNSO Council, which it, in turn, discusses, accepts, modifies or rejects, as Council deems appropriate. On behalf of the SCI, we hope that this background information will inform your discussions, however the SCI would be happy to further brief the Council on the Charter and consensus issues, if so requested. We would also be grateful to know as soon as possible if the Council, as the Chartering organization, would prefer to take on the task of revising the SCI Charter or pass that responsibility to the SCI once it has made its determination on the consensus issue. The SCI stands ready to assist in this task in whichever way the Council deems appropriate. We await your guidance. Kind regards, Ron Andruff SCI Chair Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From randruff at rnapartners.com Fri Oct 18 15:50:09 2013 From: randruff at rnapartners.com (Ron Andruff) Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 11:50:09 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: SCI Charter Revisions Message-ID: <21e7wkb4dl8x4u50dl4o2wlh.1382111409601@email.android.com> Thank you, Julie. That clarifies the matter. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff www.lifedotsport.com? -------- Original message -------- From: Julie Hedlund Date: 10/18/2013 10:57 (GMT-05:00) To: Ron Andruff ,gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: SCI Charter Revisions Ron, In order for the motion to be on the table for the meeting on the 31st it must be submitted by Monday the 21st. ?This does not preclude, however, the Council from having the discussion on the methodology at the meeting on the 31st. ?It just means that if the Council agrees on the methodology in its discussion on the 31st it will also be able to approve the charter (revised or not) also during that meeting. ?The Charter can be revised (if necessary) following that discussion and submitted for approval during the same meeting. ? If the motion is not submitted by the motion deadline then the Council would not be able to approve the charter on the 31st, but would have to wait until the next meeting (Buenos Aires) to do so. Best regards, Julie From: Ron Andruff Date: Friday, October 18, 2013 10:51 AM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Cc: Julie Hedlund Subject: RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: SCI Charter Revisions Thank you, Julie, Wolf-Ulrich, ? Having reviewed the motion, it appears to be in order with one caveat; I believe that it is imperative that the GNSO Council come to a final determination on the decision-making methodology before the motion is introduced.? That may well be the intention and your understanding, but I did want to flag that for clarity.? No point in voting on a ?half-baked cake?, as it were. ? The SCI looks forward to hearing the outcome of the Council October 31st meeting. ? Kind regards, ? RA ? Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com ? From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 09:31 To: Ron Andruff; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: SCI Charter Revisions ? Dear Ron and SCI members, ? Wolf-Ulrich has agreed to submit the attached motion for consideration by the Council at its meeting on 31 October for approval of the charter. ?At its meeting the Council also will discuss the decision-making methodology, so it is possible that the Council may revise the charter prior to its approval. ?I will update you on 31 October as to the outcome of the discussion, and whether the charter is revised and/or -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Thu Oct 31 12:04:56 2013 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 05:04:56 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Charter Approved by GNSO Council Message-ID: Dear SCI Members, At its meeting today, 31 October 2013, the GNSO Council approved the attached charter of the SCI via Motion 3 listed here: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+31+October+2 013. The approved charter has been posted to the SCI wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/3.+Charter. Please note that the GNSO Council decided not to alter the decision-making process at this time, but reserved the possibility of revisiting the discussion on this issue at another time. Thus, the decision-making process of the SCI will continue as it appeared in the original charter: "Unless otherwise determined by the SCI members, committee decisions will be made by ?full consensus? process as described in the GNSO Working Group Guidelines (see section 3.6)." A note has been included in the charter that this process is subject to Council consideration. As there were no volunteers for the position of liaison from the SCI to the Council, the GNSO Council decided to wait to appoint a liaison until after the new Council is seated in Buenos Aires. However, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben suggested Mikey O'Conner as a possible liaison. Please let me know if you have any questions. I will send the link to the transcript of the GNSO Council meeting as soon as it is available. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Revised Charter of the SCI Approved by the GNSO Council 31 October 2013.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 24360 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de Thu Oct 31 12:21:49 2013 From: wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de (WUKnoben) Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 13:21:49 +0100 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Charter Approved by GNSO Council In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <14AC2F4D8CC247E6B7A97103B405A123@WUKPC> Thanks Julie, comprehensively described. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Julie Hedlund Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 1:04 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Charter Approved by GNSO Council Dear SCI Members, At its meeting today, 31 October 2013, the GNSO Council approved the attached charter of the SCI via Motion 3 listed here: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+31+October+2013. The approved charter has been posted to the SCI wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/3.+Charter. Please note that the GNSO Council decided not to alter the decision-making process at this time, but reserved the possibility of revisiting the discussion on this issue at another time. Thus, the decision-making process of the SCI will continue as it appeared in the original charter: "Unless otherwise determined by the SCI members, committee decisions will be made by ?full consensus? process as described in the GNSO Working Group Guidelines (see section 3.6)." A note has been included in the charter that this process is subject to Council consideration. As there were no volunteers for the position of liaison from the SCI to the Council, the GNSO Council decided to wait to appoint a liaison until after the new Council is seated in Buenos Aires. However, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben suggested Mikey O'Conner as a possible liaison. Please let me know if you have any questions. I will send the link to the transcript of the GNSO Council meeting as soon as it is available. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From randruff at rnapartners.com Thu Oct 31 16:52:17 2013 From: randruff at rnapartners.com (Ron Andruff) Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 12:52:17 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Charter Approved by GNSO Council In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000e01ced659$90e62b80$b2b28280$@rnapartners.com> Thank you, Julie. And thanks to all of the members of the Committee in getting our Charter updated and approved by Council. A job well done! Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 08:05 To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Charter Approved by GNSO Council Dear SCI Members, At its meeting today, 31 October 2013, the GNSO Council approved the attached charter of the SCI via Motion 3 listed here: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+31+October+2 013. The approved charter has been posted to the SCI wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/3.+Charter. Please note that the GNSO Council decided not to alter the decision-making process at this time, but reserved the possibility of revisiting the discussion on this issue at another time. Thus, the decision-making process of the SCI will continue as it appeared in the original charter: "Unless otherwise determined by the SCI members, committee decisions will be made by "full consensus" process as described in the GNSO Working Group Guidelines (see section 3.6)." A note has been included in the charter that this process is subject to Council consideration. As there were no volunteers for the position of liaison from the SCI to the Council, the GNSO Council decided to wait to appoint a liaison until after the new Council is seated in Buenos Aires. However, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben suggested Mikey O'Conner as a possible liaison. Please let me know if you have any questions. I will send the link to the transcript of the GNSO Council meeting as soon as it is available. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Thu Oct 31 18:47:49 2013 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 11:47:49 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Background on New Issues: Email Voting and Procedural Waivers Message-ID: Dear SCI members, In our last meeting on 08 October Ron Andruff suggested it would be helpful to frame the two new issues the GNSO Council has asked the SCI to study ? email voting and procedural waivers -- in the format of the questions listed in the charter. In addition, for future requests as Mikey O'Conner suggested staff will create an online form that requesters can complete when they have issues to bring to the SCI. The format in the charter is: 1. Which group do you represent? (E.g. Council, WG.) 2. To which rules or processes do you refer? 3. Please outline the problems 4. What specific changes do you propose to address the identified problems? 5. Do you have any additional suggestion for making the rules/processes easier to administer? In particular, the GNSO Council requested that the SCI should take up these two new issues in its Wrap Up meeting in Durban on 17 July. Accordingly, I've reviewed the transcript from that meeting and pulled out the relevant information from the brief discussion of these topics. I've put that information into the form of the questions from the charter. Please see the information below and also on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/16+November+2013. These issues are on the agenda for the SCI's next meeting, which will be held face-to-face in Buenos Aires on Saturday, 16 November from 0700-0845 local time. The GNSO Secretariat will send out a notice and reminders for the meeting. Best Regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Email voting: 1. Which group do you represent? GNSO Council 2. To which rules or processes do you refer? Voting 3. Please outline the problems: The Council does not have a mechanism to conduct votes outside of a meeting. 4. What specific changes do you propose to address the identified problems? The SCI should consider whether and how the Council could vote outside of a meeting and under what circumstances. Quote from Jonathan Robinson in the Council transcript at the Wrap Up Meeting in Durban on 18 July 2013: "So I wanted - an issue I wanted us to consider maybe giving to the SCI and then to the group or to a committee to look at is I?d like to rethink about whether potentially voting by email or something like that is a possibility? I know we?ve looked at it on and off over the years.?And if that would help speed things along it would be great to just look at that issue in just maybe we can?t do it first time around obviously but for future..." He raised this issue because the Council was in the process of scheduling a special meeting in August to conduct a vote. 5. Do you have any additional suggestion for making the rules/processes easier to administer? Voting by email could in some circumstances enable the Council to avoid having to schedule a special meeting for a vote that has to occur quickly. Waivers and/or Exceptions to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures 1. Which group do you represent? GNSO Council 2. To which rules or processes do you refer? Submitting a motion and possibly other procedures 3. Please outline the problems: The Council does not have a mechanism to waive or invoke an exception to and of its operating procedures. An example is whether the deadline for submitting motions could be waived in certain circumstances. Quote from Jonathan Robinson in the transcript at the Wrap Up Meeting in Durban on 18 July 2013: "And essentially I wasn?t empowered as chair by our rulebook to allow that motion to be put on the table even if technically although we have done it by precedent and prior practice, even if no one objected from the council I didn?t really - there isn?t really device in the rulebook to allow that to take place. So I personally I think that?s an area we should look at is the - when and under what circumstances - formal council procedure can be bypassed in the event that there is no objection from the council?" 4. What specific changes do you propose to address the identified problems? The SCI should consider whether and how the Council could vote outside of a meeting and under what circumstances. 5. Do you have any additional suggestion for making the rules/processes easier to administer? A waiver mechanism could allow the Council to consider a motion or document after the deadline of notice/submission to the Council has passed. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From AAikman at lrrlaw.com Thu Oct 31 19:23:55 2013 From: AAikman at lrrlaw.com (Aikman-Scalese, Anne) Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 19:23:55 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Background on New Issues: Email Voting and Procedural Waivers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3291ED54A36D36449ED57ED8CA77CFD995AA40B4@lrodcmbx1.lrlaw.com> Thanks Julie. I will be coming in over Adobe from Miami Beach (INTA Leadership) on November 16. ( For some reason I had an SCI call on my calendar yesterday, but nobody was there so my mistake.) Regarding the two new items, can you provide us with the EXISTING rules on (1)Voting and (2) Waiving requirements in the Operating Procedures? Thanks and congrats to the Charter team on the approval of the new Charter! Anne [cid:image001.gif at 01CED634.10C0D740] Anne E. Aikman-Scalese, Of Counsel Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP | Suite 700 One South Church Avenue | Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 (T) 520.629.4428 | (F) 520.879.4725 AAikman at LRRLaw.com | www.LRRLaw.com [cid:image002.jpg at 01CED634.10C0D740] Lewis and Roca LLP is now Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP. From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 11:48 AM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Background on New Issues: Email Voting and Procedural Waivers Dear SCI members, In our last meeting on 08 October Ron Andruff suggested it would be helpful to frame the two new issues the GNSO Council has asked the SCI to study ? email voting and procedural waivers -- in the format of the questions listed in the charter. In addition, for future requests as Mikey O'Conner suggested staff will create an online form that requesters can complete when they have issues to bring to the SCI. The format in the charter is: 1. Which group do you represent? (E.g. Council, WG.) 2. To which rules or processes do you refer? 3. Please outline the problems 4. What specific changes do you propose to address the identified problems? 5. Do you have any additional suggestion for making the rules/processes easier to administer? In particular, the GNSO Council requested that the SCI should take up these two new issues in its Wrap Up meeting in Durban on 17 July. Accordingly, I've reviewed the transcript from that meeting and pulled out the relevant information from the brief discussion of these topics. I've put that information into the form of the questions from the charter. Please see the information below and also on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/16+November+2013. These issues are on the agenda for the SCI's next meeting, which will be held face-to-face in Buenos Aires on Saturday, 16 November from 0700-0845 local time. The GNSO Secretariat will send out a notice and reminders for the meeting. Best Regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Email voting: 1. Which group do you represent? GNSO Council 2. To which rules or processes do you refer? Voting 3. Please outline the problems: The Council does not have a mechanism to conduct votes outside of a meeting. 1. What specific changes do you propose to address the identified problems? The SCI should consider whether and how the Council could vote outside of a meeting and under what circumstances. Quote from Jonathan Robinson in the Council transcript at the Wrap Up Meeting in Durban on 18 July 2013: "So I wanted - an issue I wanted us to consider maybe giving to the SCI and then to the group or to a committee to look at is I?d like to rethink about whether potentially voting by email or something like that is a possibility? I know we?ve looked at it on and off over the years.?And if that would help speed things along it would be great to just look at that issue in just maybe we can?t do it first time around obviously but for future..." He raised this issue because the Council was in the process of scheduling a special meeting in August to conduct a vote. 2. Do you have any additional suggestion for making the rules/processes easier to administer? Voting by email could in some circumstances enable the Council to avoid having to schedule a special meeting for a vote that has to occur quickly. Waivers and/or Exceptions to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures 1. Which group do you represent? GNSO Council 2. To which rules or processes do you refer? Submitting a motion and possibly other procedures 1. Please outline the problems: The Council does not have a mechanism to waive or invoke an exception to and of its operating procedures. An example is whether the deadline for submitting motions could be waived in certain circumstances. Quote from Jonathan Robinson in the transcript at the Wrap Up Meeting in Durban on 18 July 2013: "And essentially I wasn?t empowered as chair by our rulebook to allow that motion to be put on the table even if technically although we have done it by precedent and prior practice, even if no one objected from the council I didn?t really - there isn?t really device in the rulebook to allow that to take place. So I personally I think that?s an area we should look at is the - when and under what circumstances - formal council procedure can be bypassed in the event that there is no objection from the council?" 2. What specific changes do you propose to address the identified problems? The SCI should consider whether and how the Council could vote outside of a meeting and under what circumstances. 3. Do you have any additional suggestion for making the rules/processes easier to administer? A waiver mechanism could allow the Council to consider a motion or document after the deadline of notice/submission to the Council has passed. ________________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. ?2510-2521. In accordance with Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, we advise you that if this message or any attachments contains any tax advice, such tax advice was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 3765 bytes Desc: image001.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2055 bytes Desc: image002.jpg URL: From randruff at rnapartners.com Thu Oct 31 19:50:11 2013 From: randruff at rnapartners.com (Ron Andruff) Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 15:50:11 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Background on New Issues: Email Voting and Procedural Waivers Message-ID: Thank you, Julie. RA Ron Andruff www.lifedotsport.com? -------- Original message -------- From: Julie Hedlund Date: 10/31/2013 14:47 (GMT-05:00) To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Background on New Issues: Email Voting and Procedural Waivers Dear SCI members, In our last meeting on 08 October Ron Andruff suggested it would be helpful to frame the two new issues the GNSO Council has asked the SCI to study??? email voting and procedural waivers --??in the format of the questions listed in the charter. ?In addition, for future requests as Mikey O'Conner suggested staff will create an online form that requesters can complete when they have issues to bring to the SCI. ?The format in the charter is: Which group do you represent? (E.g. Council, WG.) To which rules or processes do you refer? Please outline the problems What specific changes do you propose to address the identified problems? Do you have any additional suggestion for making the rules/processes easier to administer? In particular, the GNSO Council requested that the SCI should take up these two new issues in its Wrap Up meeting in Durban on 17 July. ? Accordingly, I've reviewed the transcript from that meeting and pulled out the relevant information from the brief discussion of these topics. ?I've put that information into the form of the questions from the charter. ?Please see the information below and also on the wiki at:?https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/16+November+2013. ?These issues are on the agenda for the SCI's next meeting, which will be held face-to-face in Buenos Aires on Saturday, 16 November from 0700-0845 local time. ?The GNSO Secretariat will send out a notice and reminders for the meeting. Best Regards, Julie? Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Email voting: Which group do you represent??GNSO Council To which rules or processes do you refer??Voting Please outline the problems:?The Council does not have a mechanism to conduct votes outside of a meeting. What specific changes do you propose to address the identified problems???The SCI should consider whether and how the Council could vote outside of a meeting and under what circumstances. ?Quote from Jonathan Robinson in the Council transcript at the Wrap Up Meeting in Durban on 18 July 2013: "So I wanted - an issue I wanted us to consider maybe giving to the SCI and?then to the group or to a committee to look at is I?d like to rethink about?whether potentially voting by email or something like that is a possibility??I know we?ve looked at it on and off over the years.?And if that would help speed things along it would be great to just look at that?issue in just maybe we can?t do it first time around obviously but for future..." ?He raised this issue because the Council was in the process of scheduling a special meeting in August to conduct a vote. Do you have any additional suggestion for making the rules/processes easier to administer??Voting by email could in some circumstances enable the Council to avoid having to schedule a special meeting for a vote that has to occur quickly. Waivers and/or Exceptions to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures Which group do you represent??GNSO Council To which rules or processes do you refer??Submitting a motion and possibly other procedures Please outline the problems:?The Council does not have a mechanism to waive or invoke an exception to and of its operating procedures. ?An example is whether the deadline for submitting motions could be waived in certain circumstances. ?Quote from Jonathan Robinson in the transcript at the Wrap Up Meeting in Durban on 18 July 2013: "And essentially I wasn?t empowered as chair by our rulebook to allow that?motion to be put on the table even if technically although we have done it by?precedent and prior practice, even if no one objected from the council I didn?t?really - there isn?t really device in the rulebook to allow that to take place.?So I personally I think that?s an area we should look at is the - when and?under what circumstances - formal council procedure can be bypassed in the?event that there is no objection from the council?" What specific changes do you propose to address the identified problems???The SCI should consider whether and how the Council could vote outside of a meeting and under what circumstances. Do you have any additional suggestion for making the rules/processes easier to administer??A waiver mechanism could allow the Council to consider a motion or document after the deadline of notice/submission to the Council has passed. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Thu Oct 31 21:57:30 2013 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 14:57:30 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Re: Background on New Issues: Email Voting and Procedural Waivers In-Reply-To: <3291ED54A36D36449ED57ED8CA77CFD995AA40B4@lrodcmbx1.lrlaw.com> Message-ID: Dear Anne, As the Council noted in Durban during its wrap up meeting, the current procedures do not include a process for the Council to hold a vote outside of a meeting, although they do allow absentee voting for certain votes and under certain conditions, but only follow a meeting during which a vote was taken. Please see Section 4.0 Voting in the GNSO Council Operating Procedures (page 11) at: http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-13jun13-en.pdf. Also, the language in this section presumes that a vote is taking place at a meeting. For example, Section 4.1 Quorum says, "In order for the GNSO Council to initiate a vote, a quorum must be present." The word "present" implies presence at a meeting. Section 4.2 Voting Thresholds says, "For all votes taken, the number of eligible voters in each House shall be fixed to the number of seats allocated in the Bylaws (a.k.a. the denominator) and is not affected by the number of members present or absent at the meeting [emphasis added] in which the motion or other action is initiated." With respect to waiving requirements, as the Council noted there are no provisions in the procedures. One of the issues noted by the Council in Durban, for example, was that it could not consider a motion that was submitted after the deadline for submitting reports and motions. Section 3.3 Notice of Meetings states, "Reports and motions should be submitted to the GNSO Council for inclusion on the agenda as soon as possible, but no later than 23h59 Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) on the day, 10 calendar days before the GNSO Council meeting." There is no language in this section that allows the Council to make an exception to this notice requirement. Moreover, there is no general statement in the procedures that allows the Council to waive its procedures or as Jonathan noted below under which "formal council procedure can be bypassed in the event that there is no objection from the council." I hope this is helpful, but please let me know if you have additional questions. Best regards, Julie From: , Anne Date: Thursday, October 31, 2013 3:23 PM To: Julie Hedlund , "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Cc: "Cover, Cynthia" Subject: RE: Background on New Issues: Email Voting and Procedural Waivers Thanks Julie. I will be coming in over Adobe from Miami Beach (INTA Leadership) on November 16. ( For some reason I had an SCI call on my calendar yesterday, but nobody was there so my mistake.) Regarding the two new items, can you provide us with the EXISTING rules on (1)Voting and (2) Waiving requirements in the Operating Procedures? Thanks and congrats to the Charter team on the approval of the new Charter! Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese, Of Counsel Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP | Suite 700 One South Church Avenue | Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 (T) 520.629.4428 | (F) 520.879.4725 AAikman at LRRLaw.com | www.LRRLaw.com Lewis and Roca LLP is now Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP. From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 11:48 AM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Background on New Issues: Email Voting and Procedural Waivers Dear SCI members, In our last meeting on 08 October Ron Andruff suggested it would be helpful to frame the two new issues the GNSO Council has asked the SCI to study ? email voting and procedural waivers -- in the format of the questions listed in the charter. In addition, for future requests as Mikey O'Conner suggested staff will create an online form that requesters can complete when they have issues to bring to the SCI. The format in the charter is: 1. Which group do you represent? (E.g. Council, WG.) 2. To which rules or processes do you refer? 3. Please outline the problems 4. What specific changes do you propose to address the identified problems? 5. Do you have any additional suggestion for making the rules/processes easier to administer? In particular, the GNSO Council requested that the SCI should take up these two new issues in its Wrap Up meeting in Durban on 17 July. Accordingly, I've reviewed the transcript from that meeting and pulled out the relevant information from the brief discussion of these topics. I've put that information into the form of the questions from the charter. Please see the information below and also on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/16+November+2013. These issues are on the agenda for the SCI's next meeting, which will be held face-to-face in Buenos Aires on Saturday, 16 November from 0700-0845 local time. The GNSO Secretariat will send out a notice and reminders for the meeting. Best Regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Email voting: 1. Which group do you represent? GNSO Council 2. To which rules or processes do you refer? Voting 3. Please outline the problems: The Council does not have a mechanism to conduct votes outside of a meeting. 1. What specific changes do you propose to address the identified problems? The SCI should consider whether and how the Council could vote outside of a meeting and under what circumstances. Quote from Jonathan Robinson in the Council transcript at the Wrap Up Meeting in Durban on 18 July 2013: "So I wanted - an issue I wanted us to consider maybe giving to the SCI and then to the group or to a committee to look at is I?d like to rethink about whether potentially voting by email or something like that is a possibility? I know we?ve looked at it on and off over the years.?And if that would help speed things along it would be great to just look at that issue in just maybe we can?t do it first time around obviously but for future..." He raised this issue because the Council was in the process of scheduling a special meeting in August to conduct a vote. 2. Do you have any additional suggestion for making the rules/processes easier to administer? Voting by email could in some circumstances enable the Council to avoid having to schedule a special meeting for a vote that has to occur quickly. Waivers and/or Exceptions to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures 1. Which group do you represent? GNSO Council 2. To which rules or processes do you refer? Submitting a motion and possibly other procedures 1. Please outline the problems: The Council does not have a mechanism to waive or invoke an exception to and of its operating procedures. An example is whether the deadline for submitting motions could be waived in certain circumstances. Quote from Jonathan Robinson in the transcript at the Wrap Up Meeting in Durban on 18 July 2013: "And essentially I wasn?t empowered as chair by our rulebook to allow that motion to be put on the table even if technically although we have done it by precedent and prior practice, even if no one objected from the council I didn?t really - there isn?t really device in the rulebook to allow that to take place. So I personally I think that?s an area we should look at is the - when and under what circumstances - formal council procedure can be bypassed in the event that there is no objection from the council?" 2. What specific changes do you propose to address the identified problems? The SCI should consider whether and how the Council could vote outside of a meeting and under what circumstances. 3. Do you have any additional suggestion for making the rules/processes easier to administer? A waiver mechanism could allow the Council to consider a motion or document after the deadline of notice/submission to the Council has passed. This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. ?2510-2521. In accordance with Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, we advise you that if this message or any attachments contains any tax advice, such tax advice was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 3765 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2055 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From AAikman at lrrlaw.com Thu Oct 31 22:18:20 2013 From: AAikman at lrrlaw.com (Aikman-Scalese, Anne) Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 22:18:20 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Background on New Issues: Email Voting and Procedural Waivers In-Reply-To: References: <3291ED54A36D36449ED57ED8CA77CFD995AA40B4@lrodcmbx1.lrlaw.com> Message-ID: <3291ED54A36D36449ED57ED8CA77CFD995AA54CF@lrodcmbx1.lrlaw.com> Thanks Julie - very helpful. One of the issues that is problematic in relation to the second task is that a Councilor won't know in advance of the meeting whether a requirement will be waived or not and thus may not have had time to address the issue(s) with his/her constituency or stakeholder group. Multiple late motions would present a large problem in relation to any given meeting. ( As to motions, it seems the ten calendar day advance notice has been working well in terms of the ability to brief stakeholders and receive input prior to GNSO Council meetings. ) We should likely look at several different types of situations that might make a waiver procedure desirable. Those who have been or are sitting on GNSO Council now may be good resources for suggestions as to various situations where waiver might be appropriate. Anne [cid:image001.gif at 01CED64B.5185AF50] Anne E. Aikman-Scalese, Of Counsel Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP | Suite 700 One South Church Avenue | Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 (T) 520.629.4428 | (F) 520.879.4725 AAikman at LRRLaw.com | www.LRRLaw.com [cid:image002.jpg at 01CED64B.5185AF50] Lewis and Roca LLP is now Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP. From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org] Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 2:58 PM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Cc: Cover, Cynthia Subject: Re: Background on New Issues: Email Voting and Procedural Waivers Dear Anne, As the Council noted in Durban during its wrap up meeting, the current procedures do not include a process for the Council to hold a vote outside of a meeting, although they do allow absentee voting for certain votes and under certain conditions, but only follow a meeting during which a vote was taken. Please see Section 4.0 Voting in the GNSO Council Operating Procedures (page 11) at: http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-13jun13-en.pdf. Also, the language in this section presumes that a vote is taking place at a meeting. For example, Section 4.1 Quorum says, "In order for the GNSO Council to initiate a vote, a quorum must be present." The word "present" implies presence at a meeting. Section 4.2 Voting Thresholds says, "For all votes taken, the number of eligible voters in each House shall be fixed to the number of seats allocated in the Bylaws (a.k.a. the denominator) and is not affected by the number of members present or absent at the meeting [emphasis added] in which the motion or other action is initiated." With respect to waiving requirements, as the Council noted there are no provisions in the procedures. One of the issues noted by the Council in Durban, for example, was that it could not consider a motion that was submitted after the deadline for submitting reports and motions. Section 3.3 Notice of Meetings states, "Reports and motions should be submitted to the GNSO Council for inclusion on the agenda as soon as possible, but no later than 23h59 Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) on the day, 10 calendar days before the GNSO Council meeting." There is no language in this section that allows the Council to make an exception to this notice requirement. Moreover, there is no general statement in the procedures that allows the Council to waive its procedures or as Jonathan noted below under which "formal council procedure can be bypassed in the event that there is no objection from the council." I hope this is helpful, but please let me know if you have additional questions. Best regards, Julie From: , Anne > Date: Thursday, October 31, 2013 3:23 PM To: Julie Hedlund >, "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" > Cc: "Cover, Cynthia" > Subject: RE: Background on New Issues: Email Voting and Procedural Waivers Thanks Julie. I will be coming in over Adobe from Miami Beach (INTA Leadership) on November 16. ( For some reason I had an SCI call on my calendar yesterday, but nobody was there so my mistake.) Regarding the two new items, can you provide us with the EXISTING rules on (1)Voting and (2) Waiving requirements in the Operating Procedures? Thanks and congrats to the Charter team on the approval of the new Charter! Anne [cid:image001.gif at 01CED64B.5185AF50] Anne E. Aikman-Scalese, Of Counsel Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP | Suite 700 One South Church Avenue | Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 (T) 520.629.4428 | (F) 520.879.4725 AAikman at LRRLaw.com | www.LRRLaw.com [cid:image002.jpg at 01CED64B.5185AF50] Lewis and Roca LLP is now Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP. From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 11:48 AM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Background on New Issues: Email Voting and Procedural Waivers Dear SCI members, In our last meeting on 08 October Ron Andruff suggested it would be helpful to frame the two new issues the GNSO Council has asked the SCI to study - email voting and procedural waivers -- in the format of the questions listed in the charter. In addition, for future requests as Mikey O'Conner suggested staff will create an online form that requesters can complete when they have issues to bring to the SCI. The format in the charter is: 1. Which group do you represent? (E.g. Council, WG.) 2. To which rules or processes do you refer? 3. Please outline the problems 4. What specific changes do you propose to address the identified problems? 5. Do you have any additional suggestion for making the rules/processes easier to administer? In particular, the GNSO Council requested that the SCI should take up these two new issues in its Wrap Up meeting in Durban on 17 July. Accordingly, I've reviewed the transcript from that meeting and pulled out the relevant information from the brief discussion of these topics. I've put that information into the form of the questions from the charter. Please see the information below and also on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/16+November+2013. These issues are on the agenda for the SCI's next meeting, which will be held face-to-face in Buenos Aires on Saturday, 16 November from 0700-0845 local time. The GNSO Secretariat will send out a notice and reminders for the meeting. Best Regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Email voting: 1. Which group do you represent? GNSO Council 2. To which rules or processes do you refer? Voting 3. Please outline the problems: The Council does not have a mechanism to conduct votes outside of a meeting. 1. What specific changes do you propose to address the identified problems? The SCI should consider whether and how the Council could vote outside of a meeting and under what circumstances. Quote from Jonathan Robinson in the Council transcript at the Wrap Up Meeting in Durban on 18 July 2013: "So I wanted - an issue I wanted us to consider maybe giving to the SCI and then to the group or to a committee to look at is I'd like to rethink about whether potentially voting by email or something like that is a possibility? I know we've looked at it on and off over the years....And if that would help speed things along it would be great to just look at that issue in just maybe we can't do it first time around obviously but for future..." He raised this issue because the Council was in the process of scheduling a special meeting in August to conduct a vote. 2. Do you have any additional suggestion for making the rules/processes easier to administer? Voting by email could in some circumstances enable the Council to avoid having to schedule a special meeting for a vote that has to occur quickly. Waivers and/or Exceptions to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures 1. Which group do you represent? GNSO Council 2. To which rules or processes do you refer? Submitting a motion and possibly other procedures 1. Please outline the problems: The Council does not have a mechanism to waive or invoke an exception to and of its operating procedures. An example is whether the deadline for submitting motions could be waived in certain circumstances. Quote from Jonathan Robinson in the transcript at the Wrap Up Meeting in Durban on 18 July 2013: "And essentially I wasn't empowered as chair by our rulebook to allow that motion to be put on the table even if technically although we have done it by precedent and prior practice, even if no one objected from the council I didn't really - there isn't really device in the rulebook to allow that to take place. So I personally I think that's an area we should look at is the - when and under what circumstances - formal council procedure can be bypassed in the event that there is no objection from the council?" 2. What specific changes do you propose to address the identified problems? The SCI should consider whether and how the Council could vote outside of a meeting and under what circumstances. 3. Do you have any additional suggestion for making the rules/processes easier to administer? A waiver mechanism could allow the Council to consider a motion or document after the deadline of notice/submission to the Council has passed. ________________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. ?2510-2521. In accordance with Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, we advise you that if this message or any attachments contains any tax advice, such tax advice was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer. ________________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. ?2510-2521. In accordance with Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, we advise you that if this message or any attachments contains any tax advice, such tax advice was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 3765 bytes Desc: image001.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2055 bytes Desc: image002.jpg URL: