[council] Regarding vote count for motion to request an issues report on IGOs

Bruce Tonkin Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au
Fri May 25 00:04:12 UTC 2007

Hello Mawaki
> I just listened to the MP3. Regarding the item 5 (see below), my
> count of the votes does not match the one you announced on the
> call, Bruce, i.e. "10 votes in favor". I have counted 8 YES
> (Bruce, Philip, Kristina, Mike, Ross, Alistair, Tony, and Greg),
> 6 NO (Avri, Robin, Norbert, Sophia, Chuck, and Edmond), and 1
> Abstention (Thomas).

My notes recorded the following votes in favour of the motion:

Philip Sheppard (1 vote)
Mike Rodenbaugh (1 vote)
Alistair Dixon (1 vote)
Tony Harris (1 vote)
Greg Ruth (1 vote)
Ross Rader (2 votes)
Bruce Tonkin (2 votes)
Kristina Rosette (1 vote)

8 Council members accounting for 10 votes, voted in favour.

The difference in count is because I have used weighted voting in
accordance with the bylaws:

"The number of votes that members of the GNSO Council may cast shall be
equalized so that the aggregate number of votes of representatives
selected by the Constituencies (currently the gTLD Registries and
Registrars) that are under contract with ICANN obligating them to
implement ICANN-adopted policies is equal to the number of votes of
representatives selected by other Constituencies. Initially, each member
of the GNSO Council selected by the gTLD Registries Constituency or the
Registrars Constituency shall be entitled to cast two votes and all
other members (including those selected by the Nominating Committee)
shall be entitled to cast one vote. In the event that there is a change
in the Constituencies that are entitled to select voting members of the
GNSO Council, the Board shall review the change in circumstances and by
resolution revise the procedure for equalization of votes in a manner
consistent with this paragraph 2."

With respect to a call for an issues report, this is covered under:

"The GNSO Council may initiate the PDP by a vote of at least twenty-five
percent (25%) of the members of the Council present at any meeting in
which a motion to initiate the PDP is made."

There were 15 Council members present at the meeting, accounting for a
total 20 votes.

Thus 8 council members, accounting for 10 votes, was sufficient to
request that the staff produce an issues report.

I hope this is clear.   

Note that once we receive the issues report the bylaws state:

"A vote of more than 33% of the Council members present in favor of
initiating the PDP will suffice to initiate the PDP; unless the Staff
Recommendation stated that the issue is not properly within the scope of
the ICANN policy process or the GNSO, in which case a Supermajority Vote
of the Council members present in favor of initiating the PDP will be
required to initiate the PDP."

Bruce Tonkin

More information about the council mailing list