[gnso-improvem-impl-sc] MP3 recording of the SCI meeting - 08 April 2014

Nathalie Peregrine nathalie.peregrine at icann.org
Tue Apr 8 20:26:16 UTC 2014


Dear All,

Please find the MP3 recording of the Standing Committee on Improvements
Implementation meeting held on Tuesday, 08 April 2014 at 19:00 UTC.


On page:

 <http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#oct> http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#apr
(transcripts and recording are found on the calendar page)



Ronald Andruff - Commercial and Business Users Constituency - Primary -

Angie Graves - Commercial and Business Users Constituency - Alternate

Greg Shatan - IPC - Alternate

Cintra Sooknanan: NPOC Primary - SCI Vice Chair
Amr Elsadr - NCUC Alternate

Avri Doria - NCSG - Primary


Marie-Laure Lemineur - NPOC Alternative

Anne Aikman Scalese - IPC - Primary

Jennifer Standiford - Registrar Stakeholder Group - Primary

Thomas Rickert - Nominating Committee Appointee - Alternate


ICANN Staff:
Marika Konings

Julie Hedlund

Mary Wong

Nathalie Peregrine


** 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,




Adobe Chat Transcript 08 April 2014

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Dear all, welcome to the SCI meeting on the 8th April
2014 at 19:00 UTC

  Ron A:Good day ladies.  Dialing in now.

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Excellent! I had a dial out set up on the offchance

  Amr Elsadr:Hey Ron, Julie and Nathalie. Hope you're all well. Dialling in

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Hello Amr, welcome!

  Amr Elsadr:I guess I'm a few minutes early, but thought I'd try to
compensate for being late to the f2f in Singapore. :)

  Amr Elsadr:Hi. Just joined the call.

  Greg Shatan:I'm in chat/Adobe, waiting to get on call.

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Cintra has joined the AC room

  Amr Elsadr:OK. I'm in agreement with both Greg and Marika on this point.
We might want to revisit how we approach this puzzle.

  Cintra Sooknanan:hello everyone

 Ron A:Welcome Cintra

  Cintra Sooknanan:I agree the subcommittee doesnt want to overstep the
requirements of the SCI or working group requirements

  Cintra Sooknanan:also there needs to be a revisit of the terminology to
create consistency in the consensus and support definitions

  Amr Elsadr::)

  Cintra Sooknanan:+1 Amr

  Cintra Sooknanan:sorry I am not yet on the call so placing comments here
thanks Ron for the acknowledgment

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Thomas Rickert also sends his apology for today's call

  Avri Doria:i still think consenus against is identical (li=ogially ) with
no support for.  i guess i do not understand the question or the need tfor
an solution, temporary or otherwise.

  Avri Doria:but if status quo is the solution, i am fine with it.

 Avri Doria:.i.e they are ligically identical i beleive.

  Avri Doria:logically

  Amr Elsadr:Avri: I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Are you
saying the existing language supports "consensus against"?

  Avri Doria:yeah, it is called no support for.

  Avri Doria:which does not really need a sperate defintion.

  Avri Doria:maybe i am being slow, but i do think we are overthinking.

  Avri Doria:why are these two things related?  confused again?

  Avri Doria:i.e how is SCI affected by the review?

  Avri Doria:i would think they were orthogonal

  Amr Elsadr:Do you mean adding a new decision-making level added to the
existing ones? The problem with this is that we would need several new
consensus levels to that effect including consensus (not full consensus) and
strong support with significant opposition. The current language doesn't
support this.

  Avri Doria:yeah, but that is years from now.

  Avri Doria:thanks

  Marika Konings:Not if you follow the SIC Timeline presented in Singapore

  Amr Elsadr:Actually..., the only one that doesn't really need much work is

  Cintra Sooknanan:I think no support for can be demonstrated by abstaining
from a decision, not necessarily only consensus against

  Marika Konings:implementation is foreseen for Feb 15 - Feb 16 according to
the timeline presented

  Avri Doria:back to the first issue, can hav full consensus on a negative

  Avri Doria:i have no questions.

  Amr Elsadr:+minority. :)

  Cintra Sooknanan:I think the issue was that changing.negating the
statement was considered to be outside the ambit of the wg and procedurally

  Avri Doria:so we had a way to do it and dont really need to change any

  Avri Doria:if you use negative stmts it does.

  Amr Elsadr:@Marika: Yeah..., sorry about that. I probably should know more
about this. :)

  Amr Elsadr:Thanks Marika. That makes pretty good sense.

  Amr Elsadr:@Greg: Thanks. Absolutely right!! :D

  Avri Doria:noting to report.

  Avri Doria:nothing to report on email voting.

  Avri Doria:no idea

  Julie Hedlund:Actually, Anne sent in the version you see in front of you.

  Julie Hedlund:She sent it today with apologies of not being on the call.

  Avri Doria:good idea

  Amr Elsadr:I also support this idea.

  Avri Doria:yep the grup should meet and see if they want to suggest
something.  just like Marika suggested.

  Greg Shatan:I resent the waiver language to the list.

  Avri Doria:i am not sure i want to opne the whole can of worms, but  i
will pass the request on if the SCI has one.

  Ron A:Julie: Can you grab Greg's Waiver Language post?

  Julie Hedlund:I haven't received it yet Ron

  Julie Hedlund:I will when I get it.

  Cintra Sooknanan:Hello Just to clarify I am not on Council 

  Cintra Sooknanan::)

  Greg Shatan:It was originally sent to the list on 3/21 @12:54 pm (not sure
what time zone).

  Cintra Sooknanan:Happy to assist on this point though and ensure we don't
reinven the wheel (borrow mechanisms for email voting already in place by
alac/at large)

  Julie Hedlund:Sorry - This is Marika's language

  Marika Konings:I found it, I think ;-)

  Julie Hedlund:Let me pull Greg's

  Marika Konings:this is what Greg sent on 22 March

  Marika Konings:to the list

  Amr Elsadr:This isn't the right document.

  Julie Hedlund:I am looking for it

  Greg Shatan:(the "Submission Deadline").If a motion is submitted after the
Submission Deadline, the GNSO Council shall consider the motion if the
following requirements are met: .     The motion is submitted to the GNSO
Council at least 24 hours in advance of the GNSO Council meeting; .
The motion is accompanied by a request to consider the motion despite
submission after the Submission Deadline (a "Request for Consideration");.
A vote on the Request for Consideration shall be called as the first order
of business for the agenda item that deals with the motion. The vote on the
Request for Consideration must be unanimous (i.e., all Councilors or their
proxies must vote and all votes cast must be in favor of considering the
motion at such GNSO Council meeting) for the motion to be considered at such
GNSO Council meeting.If these requirements are not met, the motion shall be
considered at the next GNSO Council meeting, provided that the motion has
been submitted prior to the Submission Deadline for such next GNSO 

  Julie Hedlund:Greg is this it?

  Avri Doria:does this fail if there is an absence?

  Avri Doria:but if it is one long mtg, how can one put something on the
table on saturday for wednesday.

  Greg Shatan:You are right Marika.

  Avri Doria:given that you have to put it on the table 24 befoe a meeting.
one that is already ongoing.

  Amr Elsadr:Yes. The weekend session isn't the same as the Wednesday

  Cintra Sooknanan:I wonder if a separate section/clause should be created
for the time of the meetings, it does not seem to fit within Notice of

  Cintra Sooknanan:I also would suggest moving away from "these Rules" at
the end of the second to last paragraph, and suggest instead using "for the
purpose of providing Notice of Meetings" 

  Amr Elsadr:Proxies need to be set before the meeting starts.

  Avri Doria:why does it mater.  as long as there is quorom

  Cintra Sooknanan:how much in advance do proxies have to be set Amr?

  Amr Elsadr:I'm not sure of the deadline, but I know an official notice
needs to be sent to the GNSO secretariat.

  Avri Doria:Cintra, they need to be set by the beginning of the meeting.

  Cintra Sooknanan:thanks

  Cintra Sooknanan:so the workding in the first bullet that refers toGNSO
council also includes proxies? does it need to be explicit?

  Amr Elsadr:I think the clarification is necessary.

  Avri Doria:i still think if there is mtg quorom, that is good enough

  Avri Doria:and leave the proxy issue to quorom issue  and not get into it.

  Avri Doria:but quorom means all SGs are present.

  Avri Doria:no?

  Amr Elsadr:Avri: As far as the NCSG is concerned, councillors are not
required to vote the same. :)

  Mary Wong:@Avri, quorum is for the CPH and NCPH.

  Avri Doria:Amr i undederstand that.  why does it matter?  they can
cerainly speak fo tthe SG not beoing willing to to vote yet.

  Avri Doria:if that is the case.

  Avri Doria:i think we are over complicating.

  Marika Konings:@Cintra - it will be the responsibility of the SG/C to
inform the proxy of what the motions are under consideration and whether
there are any specific instructions with regard to voting.

  Amr Elsadr:It matters if we decide it matters and if we require unanimous
consensus, doesn't it?

  Marika Konings:a proxy is a Council member so should indeed already be

  Marika Konings:only in the case of an alternate there may be a need for
additional communication (but again, an alternate is added temporarily to
the Council list so should be aware)

  Avri Doria:proxys should always be aware, otherwise why are they proxying.

  Amr Elsadr:I still think a clarification on resubmitted motions should be

  Avri Doria:i am still hesitant to add yet another procedure that has
special count requirements,  the rules are already gothic.

  Avri Doria:bye y'all.  

  Cintra Sooknanan:bye 

  Julie Hedlund:Goodbye everyone and thank you.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-improvem-impl-sc/attachments/20140408/9aa9b87a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5457 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-improvem-impl-sc/attachments/20140408/9aa9b87a/smime.p7s>

More information about the Gnso-improvem-impl-sc mailing list