<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] Clarification of Comments
- To: GNSO Council <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [council] Clarification of Comments
- From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:24:32 -0500
- In-reply-to: <43CD8560.706@tucows.com>
- References: <43CD8560.706@tucows.com>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
hi,
I agree with this completely. we should not presume that the staff
manager cannot do the report. If they can't or if the report is
deficient in some way, which is _not_ my expectation, then we would
need to figure out what to do next, but I see no reason not to follow
the normal process at this point.
a.
On 17 jan 2006, at 19.01, Ross Rader wrote:
That said, the work undertaken as a result of this resolution
should be carried out according to the processes we've agreed to.
In our policy development process, the next step is to request the
creation of an issues report from the Staff Manager. The Staff
Manager must create an issues report for us within 15 days. I don't
believe it is appropriate for us to presume that this obligation
will not be met. In the event that we are unable to execute the
process per the requirements of the bylaws, we should consider what
our alternatives are, and proceed in a way that least offends those
bylaws. In other words, if the Staff Manager informs Council that
we can't get what we need to do our when in a time frame thats
meaningful, then we should look at other options - retaining
outside help, etc.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|