[WP1] Agenda for Meeting #20 - 22 July @ 19h UTC

Jordan Carter jordan at internetnz.net.nz
Wed Jul 22 22:50:05 UTC 2015


hi all, hi Sam:

On 23 July 2015 at 07:11, Samantha Eisner <Samantha.Eisner at icann.org> wrote:

>  Some of these are implementation details and should not be considered
> gating issues for moving forward, but I wanted to identify a couple of
> questions that come to mind in reading Izumi’s paper:
>
>
>    1. Given the waiting period, is it the intention that any Bylaws
>    change approved by the Board will have an effective date of 15/30 days past
>    approval (whatever the period identified) passes, so that there’s time for
>    the community process to follow?
>
> I think that the effective date should match the petitioning period.

So if the petitioning period (for an SO or AC to cause consideration of a
bylaws veto) is fifteen days, the Board resolution adopting the bylaws
change should specify that it will take effect fifteen days after
announcement of the Board's decision, unless there is a successful petition
to launch the community power.

>
>    1. Are there any requirements that the issues raised as the reason for
>    community rejection of the Bylaws be raised within the earlier public
>    comment over the proposed Bylaws changes?
>
> We have not specified this though I think it is implicit. Given that the
bylaws do not require the Board to follow the public consultation phase,
perhaps we could match this up in WS2 (codifying consultation obligations
for bylaws changes, and then codifying that issues for veto must be raised
- as per the budget process?).

>
>    1. There is reference in here to changes to mission, commitments and
>    core values – aren’t those to be included in the fundamental Bylaws and
>    therefore subject to a different process?  Or is this about changes that
>    might result in parts of the Bylaws not being consistent with the
>    mission/commitments/core values?
>
> The example is out of date - it reflects the status quo, but not the
situation once the package is agreed. So they need to be corrected and
updated. Will take that on board.


Cheers
Jordan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp1/attachments/20150723/4f7d0474/attachment.html>


More information about the WP1 mailing list