<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[council] Reason for vote on Motion One on the WHOIS service on 060720
- To: Council GNSO <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [council] Reason for vote on Motion One on the WHOIS service on 060720
- From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 09:26:23 -0400
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi,
Having just voted affirmatively for a motion I spoke against, I
figured I should put a brief explanation into the record.
As I stated during the call and in previous emails I think:
- council members should always be free to explain their votes if
they so desire and that it should not take a special motion to enable
this activity.
- task force members are always free to, and in fact responsible for,
paying attention to input from the community and from other stakeholders
- it seems like it should be standard policy for the council to
consult with the advisory committees before making a final decision
on the final report from a task force. In fact I thought this was
one of the reasons for liaison relationships. (BTW, I have wondered
whether we should we have reciprocal liaisons on the advisory
committees?)
- the council should always consider a report carefully and
reconsider any of its previous decisions in the light of new analyses
or new facts.
For the reasons above, I thought that most of the motion was at best
superfluous.
I did think that it would be useful for the staff to produce a
summary of the input and was unwilling to vote against a motion that
was explicit in its support of council openness.
I, therefore, voted affirmatively.
a.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|