From nathalie.peregrine at icann.org Mon Jul 7 14:38:00 2014 From: nathalie.peregrine at icann.org (Nathalie Peregrine) Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2014 07:38:00 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] GNSO Working Group Calendar Invitations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear all, The GNSO Secretariat is happy to announce that they are now going to add calendar invitations to the usual Working Group invitation emails. Therefore, from today onwards, along with the regular email invitation, there will be a calendar invitation attached to the email. This invitation should adapt to all formats of email calendar. Should you wish to test this feature, please proceed as below: 1- Open the attachment and accept the invitation. Please do NOT send the reply back to the sender. 2- Please check calendar invite is in correct slot according to your individual calendar time zone 3- Please email gnso-secs at icann.org with any worry or concern you may have with this feature. We will be sending out emails in a few weeks' time to get member feedback. Thank you! Nathalie GNSO Secretariat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5457 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mary.wong at icann.org Tue Jul 8 23:29:04 2014 From: mary.wong at icann.org (Mary Wong) Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 16:29:04 -0700 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Feedback on draft Waiver of 10-day Motion Deadline language Message-ID: Dear SCI members, Following from the SCI?s meeting in London, attached please find the latest proposed draft of the waiver rule. As noted in London, the only remaining issue for resolution is the language regarding what happens if a late-submitted motion does NOT fulfill the specified criteria that will allow the Council to consider it at that meeting, ie. whether this proposed motion need to be resubmitted for the next Council meeting. The attached draft language represents the current state of deliberations on the issue. As agreed in London, please send suggestions and comments to the list within 14 days of this email. On the separate topic of Electronic/Remote Voting, please note that the sub group leading that drafting effort will be meeting to follow up on the discussions in London, following which a further SCI call will be scheduled. Thanks much! 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Waiver of 10 Day Motion Deadline - 22 June 2014.doc Type: application/msword Size: 30208 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5033 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mary.wong at icann.org Mon Jul 21 18:30:28 2014 From: mary.wong at icann.org (Mary Wong) Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 18:30:28 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI meeting on Tuesday 22 July Message-ID: Dear all, I?m recirculating the attached document for your review, as 22 July is also the two-week deadline for comments on the proposed language for waiving of the 10-day GNSO Council motion deadline. In light of the above and the continuing discussion over electronic voting, here is a proposed agenda for the 22 July SCI meeting: 1. Roll Call/Updates to SOI 2. Closing of discussion on Waiver of 10-day Motion Deadline (proposal attached) 3. Continuation of discussion on Electronic Voting (document to be sent separately) 4. Next steps As always, please let either me, Julie or the GNSO Secretariat know if you (or your alternate) cannot make it for the meeting. Thanks and 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 From: Mary Wong Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2014 at 7:29 PM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: Feedback on draft Waiver of 10-day Motion Deadline language > Dear SCI members, > > Following from the SCI?s meeting in London, attached please find the latest > proposed draft of the waiver rule. As noted in London, the only remaining > issue for resolution is the language regarding what happens if a > late-submitted motion does NOT fulfill the specified criteria that will allow > the Council to consider it at that meeting, ie. whether this proposed motion > need to be resubmitted for the next Council meeting. The attached draft > language represents the current state of deliberations on the issue. > > As agreed in London, please send suggestions and comments to the list within > 14 days of this email. > > On the separate topic of Electronic/Remote Voting, please note that the sub > group leading that drafting effort will be meeting to follow up on the > discussions in London, following which a further SCI call will be scheduled. > > Thanks much! > > 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 > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Waiver of 10 Day Motion Deadline - 22 June 2014.doc Type: application/msword Size: 30208 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5033 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mary.wong at icann.org Mon Jul 21 18:38:45 2014 From: mary.wong at icann.org (Mary Wong) Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 18:38:45 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Updated Electronic Voting language (for discussion & review) Message-ID: Dear all, Please find attached the latest draft language on Electronic Voting for your review and discussion at the SCI meeting on 22 July. The E-voting sub team had scheduled a call for last week to discuss whether or not the language circulated previously needed to be updated in light of the Council?s feedback from the London meetings. The attached document contains very few substantive changes from the London version, as the members of the sub team who were on the call agreed there was no need for a substantive rewrite, and considered that the most appropriate course of action was to send it to the full SCI for review. No objection to this proposed course of action was received from sub team members who were not able to attend the sub team call. 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SCI - Remote or Electronic Voting Language 14 July 2014.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 20767 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5033 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Tue Jul 22 20:09:59 2014 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 20:09:59 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Action items: SCI Meeting 22 July Message-ID: Dear All, Please find below the action items from the call on 22 July. These also are posted to the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/22+July+2014. Our next meeting is scheduled in two weeks on Tuesday, 05 August at 1900 UTC. A separate meeting notice will be sent to the list and will include details concerning remote access. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director SCI Meeting Actions ? 22 July 1. Waiver of 10-Day Motion Deadline: 1) Put the language out for a formal consensus call (consensus must be unanimous); 2) If consensus is achieved combine with other changes to the Operating Procedures for public comment. 2. Remote/Electronic Voting: 1) Take out "regularly scheduled" in both instances where it appears in paragraph 5; 2) Send the revised language out for consensus call (consensus must be unanimous); 3) If consensus is acheived combine with other changes to the Operating Procedures for public comment. -------------- 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 terri.agnew at icann.org Tue Jul 22 21:59:34 2014 From: terri.agnew at icann.org (Terri Agnew) Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 21:59:34 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] MP3 recording of the SCI meeting - 22 July 2014 Message-ID: Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording of the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation meeting held on Tuesday, 22 July 2014 at 19:00 UTC. http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-sci-20140722-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#jul (transcripts and recording are found on the calendar page) Attendees: Ronald Andruff - Commercial and Business Users Constituency - Primary - Chair Greg Shatan - IPC - Alternate Thomas Rickert - Nominating Committee Appointee - Alternate Wolf-Ulrich Knoben - ISPs and connectivity providers Constituency (ISPCP) - Primary Member Avri Doria - Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group (NCSG) - Primary Member Cintra Sooknanan (Vice-Chair) - Not-for-Profit Organizations Constituency - NPOC Constituency - Primary Member Lori Schulman - Not-for-Profit Organizations Constituency - NPOC Constituency - Alternate Amr Elsadr - Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) - Primary Member Apologies: Jen Wolfe - Nominating Committee Appointee ICANN Staff: Mary Wong Julie Hedlund Glen de Saint Gery Terri Agnew ** 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, Terri Agnew Adobe Chat Transcript 22 July 2014 Terri Agnew:Dear all, welcome to the SCI meeting on the 22nd July 2014 at 19:00 UTC Ron A:Hello all, I just noted that we will be getting started at 3:04 EDT to all for any late comers. Ron A:all = allow Cintra Sooknanan:3.04 very precise Mary Wong:FYI Ron, I didn't get any notifications of absences/apologies; not sure if Julie or Terri or the Secretariat did ... Amr Elsadr:Hi. Just Dialled in. Apologies about the prolonged absence. Hope you're all well. Mary Wong:Welcome back Amr! Amr Elsadr:Thnx Mary. ;-) Mary Wong:Hope you (and everyone else on the call, of course) are well. Amr Elsadr:That IS bad news. :( Amr Elsadr:Thnx Ron. :-) Julie Hedlund:All -- I have unsynced the document that is being displayed. Terri Agnew:Lori Schulman has joined Lori Schulman:My apologies for the late arrival. Cintra Sooknanan:I am happy with the text suggested Ron A:Welcome Lori. Amr Elsadr:@Greg: True. Just saying IF the need arises, it will be problematic. The conditions for a resubmitted motion are quite clear. Greg Shatan:@Amr: I think its a problem that could and should be anticipated by the resubmitters. Amr Elsadr:Yes..., which is why it should be clarified when submitting the suggested language to the Council. Greg Shatan:Agree it can be noted in the submission. Mary Wong:@Greg, agreed. And to the extent there is that overlap, the provision does have a safeguard in the need for a unanimous vote to allow it. Greg Shatan:I missed the call. :-( Amr Elsadr:The language suggeste exceptional basis to me. Amr Elsadr:*suggests Mary Wong:That was my takeaway as well, Ron. Amr Elsadr:There have actually been irregularly scheduled council meetings in which votes have taken place. Amr Elsadr:@Mary: +1 Mary Wong:Or how about taking out "for inclusion on the agenda for a regularly scheduled GNSO Council meeting" so that it just reads "submitted in accordance with these Op Procs"? Lori Schulman:You use "regularly scheduled" in Section 2, bullet 3. Mary Wong:That's true Amr Elsadr:I think the context is different in those bullets. Amr Elsadr:as well as in 1 bullet 3. Amr Elsadr:@Greg: +1 Lori Schulman:Then maybe define "regularly scheduled"? Lori Schulman:It might be confusing. Lori Schulman:No intention to wreak havoc. Amr Elsadr:@Greg: Isn't this beyond the scope of this issue? Amr Elsadr:We're talking about email voting here. Mary Wong:@Avri, that is correct (as to why the phrase is being used here). Mary Wong:No worries, Ron :) Mary Wong:This language will permit the Council to have a special meeting but not necessarily take a live vote at that special meeting (for some good reason). Mary Wong:In that, they can do an e-vote after the special meeting but perhaps before the next "regularly scheduled" Council meeting, ie more flexibility. Mary Wong:@Greg, that is correct. Mary Wong:Though I'd advise leaving it in for the first sentence - it doesn't add confusion but reflects the usage elsewhere so prob no harm leaving it in? Amr Elsadr:I'm sorry. I don't understand why we need to take them out of these three sentances. They seem relevant to me. Greg Shatan:We're only suggesting taking them out of Section 5. Leaving them in elsewhere. Lori Schulman:There is static. Can't hear. Terri Agnew:You are breaking up Mary Wong:Amr sounds like he's in a high wind ... Amr Elsadr:Not here, but I hear it too. Terri Agnew:We are trying to find the line causing noise Lori Schulman:HIgh wind sound for sure. Greg Shatan:It stopped. Greg Shatan:And it's back. Lori Schulman:I understand as removing it from second sentence in %. Lori Schulman:5 Greg Shatan:The Wind Cries Mary. Lori Schulman:Wait, in actions, Mary just typed take out "regularly scheduled" in the 2 instances. I thought we said the second instance. Julie Hedlund:@Lori -- I wrote that because that is what I thought I heard Ron say. Greg Shatan:I had suggested both instances in 5. Greg Shatan:That is what Ron said.... Lori Schulman:I think it makes sense in the first instance but not the second. The second instance is where removal gives the GNSO more flexibility. Amr Elsadr:From a technical perspective, I'm curious how the ability to submit comments along with the ballots would be done. Lori Schulman:I mean leave it in in the first instance. Remove in second. Ron A:Yes, Lori. more flexibility is what this particular issue is about. Lori Schulman:Then the first instance distinguishes between "outside" and regularly scheduled meetings and should stay in for clarity. Lori Schulman:The second instance is what should be removed for flexiblity. At least, that is how I understand it. Avri Doria:btw, i have never been white water rafting, but after this meeting i realize i need to add it to my list of things to do. i mean i said it twice. Lori Schulman:I think I see. Lori Schulman:Sorry Julie. Lori Schulman:Just trying to keep up. Greg Shatan:I move that we all go white water rafting. Mary Wong::) Julie Hedlund:Sounds fun! Lori Schulman:Does that mean we are up the creek without a paddle? Mary Wong:LOL, Lori! Cintra Sooknanan:5 August Julie Hedlund:Thank you everyone! Cintra Sooknanan:Thanks, Good bye Amr Elsadr:Thanks everyone. Bye. Ron A:Thanks all! Enjoy your summer! Lori Schulman:Have fun! I will be in the woods...rafting for real in West Virginia. Ron A:Enjoy Lori!!! Lori Schulman:Thanks. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5417 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mary.wong at icann.org Wed Jul 30 22:19:20 2014 From: mary.wong at icann.org (Mary Wong) Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 22:19:20 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Updated Electronic Voting language Message-ID: Dear all, Please find attached an updated draft of the proposed Electronic Voting procedure for the GNSO Council, based on the SCI meeting on 22 July. Please note also that, after consulting with Ron as the Chair, the finalized language for this procedure will be sent out together with the previously-approved language for the 10-day Motion Waiver procedure for a formal Consensus Call. Following the conclusion of the Consensus Call and assuming the two procedures are approved, staff will then prepare to send them out - together with the previously-adopted language regarding WG Consensus Levels - for public comment and GNSO Council review. We will, as per usual practice, also notify and consult with ICANN Legal on all these adopted procedures, to ensure that they are in general conformity with other rules and processes in the ICANN community. Thanks and 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 From: Julie Hedlund Date: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 at 4:09 PM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Action items: SCI Meeting 22 July > Dear All, > > Please find below the action items from the call on 22 July. These also are > posted to the wiki at: > https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/22+July+2014. Our next meeting is > scheduled in two weeks on Tuesday, 05 August at 1900 UTC. A separate meeting > notice will be sent to the list and will include details concerning remote > access. > > Best regards, > > Julie > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director > > SCI Meeting Actions ? 22 July > 1. Waiver of 10-Day Motion Deadline: 1) Put the language out for a formal > consensus call (consensus must be unanimous); 2) If consensus is achieved > combine with other changes to the Operating Procedures for public comment. > > 2. Remote/Electronic Voting: 1) Take out "regularly scheduled" in both > instances where it appears in paragraph 5; 2) Send the revised language out > for consensus call (consensus must be unanimous); 3) If consensus is acheived > combine with other changes to the Operating Procedures for public comment. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SCI - Remote or Electronic Voting Language 29 July 2014.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 20061 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5033 bytes Desc: not available URL: From GShatan at reedsmith.com Thu Jul 31 01:08:43 2014 From: GShatan at reedsmith.com (Shatan, Gregory S.) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 01:08:43 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Updated Electronic Voting language In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: All: I am raising a process question with regard to the Electronic Voting language as it currently stands. Unlike the 10-day Waiver rule proposal and the resubmission proposal (among others), the Electronic Voting language is not currently drafted in the form of a rule that can be ?dropped into? the Operating Procedures. Instead, it is more of a statement of principles (although it has tightened up quite a bit through various drafts). If we send it out for public comment and review in this form, wouldn?t we then need to revise it to put it in the form of a draft rule, which would then go out for a second round of Consensus Call/public comment/GNSO Council review, and then (unless there are no issues raised with the drafting of the rule), wouldn?t we need to revise it again to put it in the form of a final rule for a third round of Consensus Call/public comment/GNSO Council review before it can be adopted? Would it make sense to revise the Electronic Voting language so that it is the form of a rule, which could eliminate a round of review and get the rule ?on the books? faster? (Given the evolution of the document, I think we are already halfway there.) Or is the issue sufficiently complex that it should be reviewed by the community ?in principle? first, before we turn it into a rule? Or am I missing something relating to process and procedures? Best regards, Greg From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 6:19 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Updated Electronic Voting language Dear all, Please find attached an updated draft of the proposed Electronic Voting procedure for the GNSO Council, based on the SCI meeting on 22 July. Please note also that, after consulting with Ron as the Chair, the finalized language for this procedure will be sent out together with the previously-approved language for the 10-day Motion Waiver procedure for a formal Consensus Call. Following the conclusion of the Consensus Call and assuming the two procedures are approved, staff will then prepare to send them out - together with the previously-adopted language regarding WG Consensus Levels - for public comment and GNSO Council review. We will, as per usual practice, also notify and consult with ICANN Legal on all these adopted procedures, to ensure that they are in general conformity with other rules and processes in the ICANN community. Thanks and 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 From: Julie Hedlund > Date: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 at 4:09 PM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" > Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Action items: SCI Meeting 22 July Dear All, Please find below the action items from the call on 22 July. These also are posted to the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/22+July+2014. Our next meeting is scheduled in two weeks on Tuesday, 05 August at 1900 UTC. A separate meeting notice will be sent to the list and will include details concerning remote access. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director SCI Meeting Actions ? 22 July 1. Waiver of 10-Day Motion Deadline: 1) Put the language out for a formal consensus call (consensus must be unanimous); 2) If consensus is achieved combine with other changes to the Operating Procedures for public comment. 2. Remote/Electronic Voting: 1) Take out "regularly scheduled" in both instances where it appears in paragraph 5; 2) Send the revised language out for consensus call (consensus must be unanimous); 3) If consensus is acheived combine with other changes to the Operating Procedures for public comment. * * * This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation. Disclaimer Version RS.US.201.407.01 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mary.wong at icann.org Thu Jul 31 15:49:11 2014 From: mary.wong at icann.org (Mary Wong) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 15:49:11 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Re: Updated Electronic Voting language In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi and thanks for the note, Greg. With the exception of the introductory sentence at the beginning, I believe the sub group intended that the actual language be that to be incorporated into ? or rather, added to ? the GNSO Operating Procedures. As such, would the attached updated version help? I?ve basically just numbered (or re-numbered) the sections to correspond to the numbering used in the current GNSO Operating Procedures, with ?xx? to signify the actual Section number to be allotted to the final version. Thanks and 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 From: , "Gregory S." Date: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 at 9:08 PM To: Mary Wong , "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: RE: Updated Electronic Voting language > All: > > I am raising a process question with regard to the Electronic Voting language > as it currently stands. Unlike the 10-day Waiver rule proposal and the > resubmission proposal (among others), the Electronic Voting language is not > currently drafted in the form of a rule that can be ?dropped into? the > Operating Procedures. Instead, it is more of a statement of principles > (although it has tightened up quite a bit through various drafts). > > If we send it out for public comment and review in this form, wouldn?t we > then need to revise it to put it in the form of a draft rule, which would then > go out for a second round of Consensus Call/public comment/GNSO Council > review, and then (unless there are no issues raised with the drafting of the > rule), wouldn?t we need to revise it again to put it in the form of a final > rule for a third round of Consensus Call/public comment/GNSO Council review > before it can be adopted? > > Would it make sense to revise the Electronic Voting language so that it is the > form of a rule, which could eliminate a round of review and get the rule ?on > the books? faster? (Given the evolution of the document, I think we are > already halfway there.) Or is the issue sufficiently complex that it should > be reviewed by the community ?in principle? first, before we turn it into a > rule? Or am I missing something relating to process and procedures? > > Best regards, > > Greg > > > > > From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org > [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong > Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 6:19 PM > To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org > Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Updated Electronic Voting language > > > Dear all, > > > > Please find attached an updated draft of the proposed Electronic Voting > procedure for the GNSO Council, based on the SCI meeting on 22 July. Please > note also that, after consulting with Ron as the Chair, the finalized language > for this procedure will be sent out together with the previously-approved > language for the 10-day Motion Waiver procedure for a formal Consensus Call. > Following the conclusion of the Consensus Call and assuming the two procedures > are approved, staff will then prepare to send them out - together with the > previously-adopted language regarding WG Consensus Levels - for public > comment and GNSO Council review. > > > > We will, as per usual practice, also notify and consult with ICANN Legal on > all these adopted procedures, to ensure that they are in general conformity > with other rules and processes in the ICANN community. > > > > Thanks and 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 > > > > > > From: Julie Hedlund > Date: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 at 4:09 PM > To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" > Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Action items: SCI Meeting 22 July > > >> >> Dear All, >> >> >> >> Please find below the action items from the call on 22 July. These also are >> posted to the wiki at: >> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/22+July+2014. Our next meeting >> is scheduled in two weeks on Tuesday, 05 August at 1900 UTC. A separate >> meeting notice will be sent to the list and will include details concerning >> remote access. >> >> >> >> Best regards, >> >> >> >> Julie >> >> >> >> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >> >> >> >> SCI Meeting Actions ? 22 July >> >> 1. Waiver of 10-Day Motion Deadline: 1) Put the language out for a formal >> consensus call (consensus must be unanimous); 2) If consensus is achieved >> combine with other changes to the Operating Procedures for public comment. >> >> 2. Remote/Electronic Voting: 1) Take out "regularly scheduled" in both >> instances where it appears in paragraph 5; 2) Send the revised language out >> for consensus call (consensus must be unanimous); 3) If consensus is acheived >> combine with other changes to the Operating Procedures for public comment. > > > > * * * > > This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may > well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on > notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then > delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any > purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your > cooperation. > > Disclaimer Version RS.US.201.407.01 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SCI - Remote or Electronic Voting Language 31 July 2014.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 20565 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5033 bytes Desc: not available URL: From GShatan at reedsmith.com Thu Jul 31 23:37:59 2014 From: GShatan at reedsmith.com (Shatan, Gregory S.) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 23:37:59 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Updated Electronic Voting language In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think Section 2 onwards is basically where it needs to be in order to be proposed as a rule. Section 1.2 and especially Section 1.1 need a little more help. I will go through this draft and make a few suggestions. Greg From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 11:49 AM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Re: Updated Electronic Voting language Hi and thanks for the note, Greg. With the exception of the introductory sentence at the beginning, I believe the sub group intended that the actual language be that to be incorporated into - or rather, added to - the GNSO Operating Procedures. As such, would the attached updated version help? I've basically just numbered (or re-numbered) the sections to correspond to the numbering used in the current GNSO Operating Procedures, with "xx" to signify the actual Section number to be allotted to the final version. Thanks and 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 From: , "Gregory S." > Date: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 at 9:08 PM To: Mary Wong >, "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" > Subject: RE: Updated Electronic Voting language All: I am raising a process question with regard to the Electronic Voting language as it currently stands. Unlike the 10-day Waiver rule proposal and the resubmission proposal (among others), the Electronic Voting language is not currently drafted in the form of a rule that can be "dropped into" the Operating Procedures. Instead, it is more of a statement of principles (although it has tightened up quite a bit through various drafts). If we send it out for public comment and review in this form, wouldn't we then need to revise it to put it in the form of a draft rule, which would then go out for a second round of Consensus Call/public comment/GNSO Council review, and then (unless there are no issues raised with the drafting of the rule), wouldn't we need to revise it again to put it in the form of a final rule for a third round of Consensus Call/public comment/GNSO Council review before it can be adopted? Would it make sense to revise the Electronic Voting language so that it is the form of a rule, which could eliminate a round of review and get the rule "on the books" faster? (Given the evolution of the document, I think we are already halfway there.) Or is the issue sufficiently complex that it should be reviewed by the community "in principle" first, before we turn it into a rule? Or am I missing something relating to process and procedures? Best regards, Greg From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 6:19 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Updated Electronic Voting language Dear all, Please find attached an updated draft of the proposed Electronic Voting procedure for the GNSO Council, based on the SCI meeting on 22 July. Please note also that, after consulting with Ron as the Chair, the finalized language for this procedure will be sent out together with the previously-approved language for the 10-day Motion Waiver procedure for a formal Consensus Call. Following the conclusion of the Consensus Call and assuming the two procedures are approved, staff will then prepare to send them out - together with the previously-adopted language regarding WG Consensus Levels - for public comment and GNSO Council review. We will, as per usual practice, also notify and consult with ICANN Legal on all these adopted procedures, to ensure that they are in general conformity with other rules and processes in the ICANN community. Thanks and 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 From: Julie Hedlund > Date: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 at 4:09 PM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" > Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Action items: SCI Meeting 22 July Dear All, Please find below the action items from the call on 22 July. These also are posted to the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/22+July+2014. Our next meeting is scheduled in two weeks on Tuesday, 05 August at 1900 UTC. A separate meeting notice will be sent to the list and will include details concerning remote access. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director SCI Meeting Actions - 22 July 1. Waiver of 10-Day Motion Deadline: 1) Put the language out for a formal consensus call (consensus must be unanimous); 2) If consensus is achieved combine with other changes to the Operating Procedures for public comment. 2. Remote/Electronic Voting: 1) Take out "regularly scheduled" in both instances where it appears in paragraph 5; 2) Send the revised language out for consensus call (consensus must be unanimous); 3) If consensus is acheived combine with other changes to the Operating Procedures for public comment. * * * This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation. Disclaimer Version RS.US.201.407.01 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: