Re: [council] Council meetings and motions

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

We have had occasions lately where we have crafted motion language  
during the meeting.  This is what I am trying to avoid, though I  
expect we won't avoid it completely.  As far as I know we do not have  
any by-law regulations concerning the council practice vis a vis  
motions, though we do have a rule that meetings must be announced 7  
days in advance:.
> X.3.8 ... Members entitled to cast a majority of the total number  
> of votes of GNSO Council members then in office shall constitute a  
> quorum for the transaction of business, and acts by a majority vote  
> of the GNSO Council members present at any meeting at which there  
> is a quorum shall be acts of the GNSO Council, unless otherwise  
> provided herein. (See Section 5(2) of this Article concerning the  
> number of votes that GNSO Council members may cast.) Advance notice  
> of such meetings shall be posted on the Website, if reasonably  
> practicable, at least 7 days in advance of the meeting. ...
As you say, some topics will have already been vetted and councilors  
will feel free to vote, especially if the motion is on something less  
controversial or it is on a topic that is well known for being on the  
agenda - e.g. if someone wanted to make a motion regarding the new  
GTLD work or the Whois report.  I do agree that having motions at  
least a week in advance is probably best, though I have also been  
told that one week is often not enough to get a constituency's ruling  
on a topic.  I think that in all cases, if people aren't ready to  
vote on a motion we can postpone the vote on it until a future  
meeting, but at least we will  know what we are talking about and  
have some advance look at the text of the motion being proposed.
thanks

a.

On 24 aug 2007, at 14.40, Gomes, Chuck wrote:

> Avri,
>
> Having only 48 hours advance notice for motions for which it might be
> necessary to obtain constituency feedback is usually not enough  
> notice.
> If the motion involves some issues that a constitunency has vetted  
> well
> enough in advance to understand the consituency's position without
> testing the motion on members, it might not matter.  But if a  
> motion has
> some undiscussed nuances, it might be a problem.  I had thought that
> motions were supposed to be proposed at least 7 days in advance if
> possible, but I may be wrong on that.
>
> Chuck Gomes
>
> "This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
> which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
> confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any
> unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly  
> prohibited. If
> you have received this message in error, please notify sender
> immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> > Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 1:22 PM
> > To: GNSO Council
> > Subject: [council] Council meetings and motions
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to suggest that, as much as possible, council
> > members try to float text on the list for motions they would
> > like the council to vote on at least 48 hours before any
> > meeting.  If they relate to things that are already on the
> > agenda, then I can just bring them up at the right time.  On
> > the other hand if they are not relevant to topics already on
> > the agenda, they can be considered under AOB.
> >
> > The agenda will still come out at least a week in advance and
> > having any motions as early as possible would be best, but at
> > least 2 days in advance seems helpful.
> >
> > What do others think?
> >
> > thanks
> > a.