<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] Conflicts of Interest
- To: Ken Stubbs <kstubbs@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [council] Conflicts of Interest
- From: ICANNSoph <sophiabekele@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 10:02:06 -0800
- Cc: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=HTSH0Mvf/iUPgG+GwbC3Di04C6kL4UCM2WpodwRBYMefE2riF5dxxMW50wWwppEwVhVd+QnhIwskxCyIoSs6Ems/gIc4WO+U6fVw3jHa43gWfe3nK7jn2GVxNp1ZYnx1GJQ2EyUwYdN0IRXJPIg6AkhuRXfBsbsN4nMwoLKl9oM=
- In-reply-to: <43D12320.8070604@afilias.info>
- References: <D981DAC077157C4098098372A7349D7D02BFF5B1@daebe102.NOE.Nokia.com> <43D12320.8070604@afilias.info>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I agree with all. Sophia
On 20/01/06, Ken Stubbs <kstubbs@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I am in agreement with Lucy
>
> Ken Stubbs
>
> Lucy.Nichols@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> I also endorse Bruce's voluntary initiative --at least for the time
> being. I do think the GNSO Council should consider adopting a
> permanent and mandatory conflict of interest policy.
>
> Regards,
>
> Lucy
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>] On
> Behalf Of ext Avri Doria
> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 9:38 AM
> To: Ross Rader
> Cc: Bruce Tonkin; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [council] Conflicts of Interest
>
> Hi,
>
> I think this is an excellent proposal and endorse it.
>
> a.
>
> On 20 jan 2006, at 09.56, Ross Rader wrote:
>
>
>
> Bruce Tonkin wrote:
>
>
>
> I see this being a voluntary initiative as there doesn't seem to be
> any explicit bylaw requirements.
>
>
> Bruce -
>
> I think this is an excellent proposal. As you know, the registrar
> constituency has had similar practices embodied in its bylaws for a
> number of years.
>
> However, simply because the bylaws is silent on a specific set of
> behaviors, doesn't mean that we can't officially adopt these
>
>
> behaviors
>
>
> through other means.
>
> I also believe that it is time for the Council of the GNSO to adopt
> some explicit conflict of interest management processes - but I
> believe they should be mandatory. At first, we should proceed
> cautiously with these. A light-weight approach would seem to be most
> prudent. Over time, we could improve and expand upon the approach in
> ways that make it more useful for our purposes.
>
> My preference would not be to create a "design committee" to come up
> with a comprehensive proposal at this time. As a first step, I think
> your proposal makes eminent sense, and I would like to
>
>
> discuss whether
>
>
> or not the rest of the council would be willing to undertake
>
>
> a vote to
>
>
> make these requirements mandatory. Is this something that we
>
>
> could add
>
>
> to the agenda of our next meeting?
>
> Thanks in advance for your consideration.
>
> -ross
>
>
>
>
>
--
Sophia Bekele
Voice/Fax: 925-935-1598
Mob:925-818-0948
sophiabekele@xxxxxxxxx
SKYPE: skypesoph
www.cbsintl.com
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|