[council] RE: Council report required for the Board on the recently approved WHOIS recommendation

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

I know this was addressed to Bruce, but I would like to comment that  
I think it is always better to have more public comment rather then  
less.  so if the by-laws allow it, it seems best to have a  comment  
period.

the only proviso would be how it would affect the completion  
schedule.  I.e. can a comment period be held and still have a  
decision in the pre Wellington time frame.

a.

On 22 dec 2005, at 05.21, Olof Nordling wrote:

> Hi Bruce,
> Thanks for the reminder - Maria and I have talked about it and she  
> will
> produce the report, aiming for the February Board meeting. We have  
> also
> considered whether we should launch an additional public comment  
> period on
> it. In view of the Bylaws, Art 6.3.1, we don't see that as  
> necessary in this
> case and we're keen to hear your view on it.
> Best regards
> Olof
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce Tonkin [mailto:Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au]
> Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 6:31 AM
> To: olof nordling
> Cc: council at gnso.icann.org
> Subject: Council report required for the Board on the recently  
> approved
> WHOIS recommendation
>
> Hello Olof,
>
> As the Council approved the recent WHOIS recommendation in its meeting
> on
> 28 Nov 2005.
>
> See
> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/tf-final-rpt-25oct05.htm for Final  
> Report.
>
> The next step is to finalise a "Council Report to the Board".  See  
> quote
> from the bylaws below.
>
> As discussed in the Council meeting today, it would be appropriate to
> prepare this report for consideration by the Board in its Board  
> meeting
> in February 2006.
>
> Regards,
> Bruce
>
>
>
>
> 11. Council Report to the Board
>
> The Staff Manager will be present at the final meeting of the Council,
> and will have five (5) calendar days after the meeting to incorporate
> the views of the Council into a report to be submitted to the Board  
> (the
> "Board Report"). The Board Report must contain at least the following:
>
> a. A clear statement of any Supermajority Vote recommendation of the
> Council;
>
> b. If a Supermajority Vote was not reached, a clear statement of all
> positions held by Council members. Each statement should clearly
> indicate (i) the reasons underlying each position and (ii) the
> constituency(ies) that held the position;
>
> c. An analysis of how the issue would affect each constituency,
> including any financial impact on the constituency;
>
> d. An analysis of the period of time that would likely be necessary to
> implement the policy;
>
> e. The advice of any outside advisors relied upon, which should be
> accompanied by a detailed statement of the advisor's (i)  
> qualifications
> and relevant experience; and (ii) potential conflicts of interest;
>
> f. The Final Report submitted to the Council; and
>
> g. A copy of the minutes of the Council deliberation on the policy
> issue, including the all opinions expressed during such deliberation,
> accompanied by a description of who expressed such opinions.
>
>