RE: [council] Changes to GNSO Operating Procedures

[john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Jonathan,


Our recent experience suggests that #1 is the better option.  As a resident of 
PST, it would make my life easier, but I see the global value of UCT.  



Berard



--------- Original Message ---------Subject: RE: [council] Changes to GNSO 
Operating Procedures
From: "Jonathan Robinson" <jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 4/29/13 6:31 am
To: "'Zahid Jamil'" <zahid@xxxxxxxxx>, "'Volker Greimann'" 
<vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "'Wendy Seltzer'" <wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Marika Konings'" 
<marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>, council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx


 All,
 
 I'd like to close this off and move to posting it for public comment.
 
 My understanding is that we are agreed on 10 calendar days as this is global
 and meets what was originally intended.
 
 As far as a time-zone is concerned, we have two options:
 
 1. Choose a fixed time zone in which the 23h59 cut-off occurs. There is no
 universally fair time zone to use for a global audience but UTC seems as
 close to a standard as we have.
 PST provides for a later sunset but is arguably less of a standard than UTC.
 
 OR
 
 2. Agree that the cut-off is 10 calendar days (exactly) before the meeting
 occurs. This will mean that the time of the cut-off varies on a per meeting
 basis.
 This is probably most fair but could lead to confusion since it varies on a
 per meeting basis. 
 Still, as long as the cut-off time is sent as part of the reminder in
 calling for motions, it seems reasonable.
 
 Any comments or inputs, please provide them ASAP before we move to public
 comment.
 
 Thanks,
 
 
 Jonathan
 
 -----Original Message-----
 From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
 Behalf Of Zahid Jamil
 Sent: 23 April 2013 14:47
 To: Volker Greimann
 Cc: Jonathan Robinson; Wendy Seltzer; Marika Konings;
 <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 Subject: Re: [council] Changes to GNSO Operating Procedures
 
 
 How about using 23:59 PST as the deadline?
 
 
 
 Best regards, 
 
 Zahid Jamil
 Barrister-at-law
 Jamil & Jamil
 Barristers-at-law
 219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
 Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
 Cell: +923008238230
 Tel: +92 21 35680760 / 35685276 / 35655025
 Fax: +92 21 35655026
 www.jamilandjamil.com
 
 Notice / Disclaimer
 This message contains confidential information and its contents are being
 communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended
 recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please
 notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by
 mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are
 the intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law, and
 constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege.
 The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind
 whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any
 medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or
 some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and
 consent of Jamil & Jamil is prohibited.
 
 Sent from my iPad
 
 On 23 Apr 2013, at 16:45, Volker Greimann <vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
 
 > While I support this in general, I am not sure we really need such a
 policy. The proposed language cuts the time available for bringing motions
 short for our American councillors compared to right now.
 > 
 > Volker
 > 
 >> I support Wendy's language.
 >> 
 >> 
 >> 
 >> Best regards,
 >> 
 >> Zahid Jamil
 >> Barrister-at-law
 >> Jamil & Jamil
 >> Barristers-at-law
 >> 219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
 >> Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
 >> Cell: +923008238230
 >> Tel: +92 21 35680760 / 35685276 / 35655025
 >> Fax: +92 21 35655026
 >> www.jamilandjamil.com
 >> 
 >> Notice / Disclaimer
 >> This message contains confidential information and its contents are being
 communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended
 recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please
 notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by
 mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are
 the intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law, and
 constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege.
 The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind
 whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any
 medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or
 some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and
 consent of Jamil & Jamil is prohibited.
 >> 
 >> Sent from my iPad
 >> 
 >> On 23 Apr 2013, at 16:30, "Jonathan Robinson"
 <jonathan.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
 >> 
 >>> All,
 >>> 
 >>> I am in support of Wendy's wording (with a minor tweak) as follows:
 >>> 
 >>> Reports and motions should be submitted to the GNSO Council for 
 >>> inclusion on the agenda as soon as possible, but no later than 23:59 
 >>> UTC on the day, 8 calendar days before the GNSO Council meeting.
 >>> 
 >>> Any concerns or objections, please raise ASAP otherwise I suggest we 
 >>> post for public comment.