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

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

In this case I would think that the comment period serves as a guide  
to the board on whether they should endorse the recommendations and  
what sort of the recommendations they might want to make about future  
policy processes on the topic.

I think that it is important that both the council get comment before  
making a recommendation and that the board get comment before making  
a decision.  Also acts as a community check and balance on the work  
we do.

a.

On 22 dec 2005, at 10.29, Marilyn Cade wrote:

> Sometimes I would agree, Avri.
>
>
> But in this case, I am not clear on what this would serve. I think  
> we have met the responsibility for public comment on this policy.
>
>
>  Unless you are thinking that this would offer another chance for  
> more organized, coherent, and thoughtful statements that the  
> Council would need to take into account?
>
>
> How would that work, given the state of the policy process we are  
> in now?
>
> From:  Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>
> To:  GNSO Council <council at gnso.icann.org>
> Subject:  Re: [council] RE: Council report required for the Board  
> on the recently approved WHOIS recommendation
> Date:  Thu, 22 Dec 2005 10:16:32 -0500
> >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.
> >>
> >>
> >

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20051222/2f7d57c3/attachment.html>