RE: [council] GNSO Council teleconference MP3 recording 24 May 2007

[Mawaki Chango <ki_chango@xxxxxxxxx>]

Chuck, at that point (when the basic "political" arithmetic
became clear with Glen's email), I was no longer disputing the
outcome of the vote. I am, however, always inclined to learn and
to that effect (and just for that), still interested to check
whether the two conclusions in my previous message hold, which
I've drawn from this exhance regarding our bylaws and processes.
Thanks again.

Mawaki

--- "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> One more comment Mawaki.  The result is the same whether
> weighted voting applies or not.  Note that I just included
> members present in the below calculations per the Bylaws.
> 
> No weighted voting: 8/15 = 53.3%
> 
> Weighted voting: 10/21 = 47.6%
> 
> 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 Mawaki
> Chango
> > Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 5:52 PM
> > To: GNSO.SECRETARIAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; 'Council GNSO'
> > Subject: Re: [council] GNSO Council teleconference MP3 
> > recording 24 May 2007
> > 
> > Assuredly, Glen, this clarifies:
> > 
> > 1. that the wighted vote for certain constituencies (1 rep =
> 2
> > votes) still weighs in for voting issue report, so i guess
> at 
> > this point that this is the case in every voting (or is
> there 
> > any exception where any council member's vote is equal to
> any 
> > other one's?)
> > 
> > 2. that there's no notion of majority (not even relative
> > majority) in voting issue report: if 27% of the council 
> > members on the call vote for the IR, and 30% vote against, 
> > there will still be an IR.
> > 
> > Is my understanding correct?
> > Many thanks to you Glen and Chuck for helping understand
> this.
> > 
> > Mawaki 
> > 
> > --- "GNSO.SECRETARIAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
> > <gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > Mawaki,
> > > 
> > > The vote count is:
> > > in favour:
> > > Philip Sheppard  - 1 vote
> > > Mike Rodenbaugh  - 1 vote
> > > Alistair Dixon  - 1 vote
> > > Kristina Rosette - 1 vote
> > > Tony Holmes - 1 vote
> > > Greg Ruth - 1 vote
> > > Bruce Tonkin - 2 votes
> > > Ross Rader - 2 votes
> > > 
> > > Total 10 votes in favour
> > > 
> > > against
> > > Edmon Chung - 2 Votes
> > > Chuck Gomes - 2 votes
> > > Avri Doria - 1 vote
> > > Sophia Bekele - 1 vote
> > > Robin Gross - 1 vote
> > > Norbert Klein - 1 vote
> > > Total 8 votes against
> > > 
> > > Tom Keller abstention
> > > 
> > > No votes from the following people who were absent:
> > > Ute Decker
> > > Kiyoshi Tsuru
> > > Tony Harris
> > > Mawaki Chango
> > > Cary Karp
> > > Jon Bing
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
http://www.icann.org/general/archive-bylaws/bylaws-28feb06.htm#AnnexA
> > > "1. Raising an Issue
> > > 
> > > An issue may be raised for consideration as part of the
> PDP 
> > by any of 
> > > the following:
> > > 
> > >      b. Council Initiation. The GNSO Council may initiate 
> > the PDP by a 
> > > vote of at least twenty-five percent (25%) of the members
> of the 
> > > Council present at any meeting in which a motion to 
> > initiate the PDP 
> > > is made."
> > > 
> > > There were 15 voting Council members present, representing
> 
> > 20 votes. 
> > > The 10 votes in favour represent 50%, while only 25% is
> required by 
> > > the bylaws.
> > > 
> > > I hope this clarifies the situation.
> > > Please let me know if you have other questions. The
> minutes will be 
> > > out soon.
> > > 
> > > Thank you.
> > > Kind regards,
> > > 
> > > Glen
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Mawaki Chango a écrit :
> > > > Council,
> > > > 
> > > > My apologies I was finally not available to make it to
> today 
> > > > teleconf as I had expected.
> > > > 
> > > > I just listened to the MP3. Regarding the item 5 (see
> > > below), my
> > > > count of the votes does not match the one you announced
> on
> > > the
> > > > call, Bruce, i.e. "10 votes in favor". I have counted 8 
> > YES (Bruce, 
> > > > Philip, Kristina, Mike, Ross, Alistair, Tony, and
> > > Greg),
> > > > 6 NO (Avri, Robin, Norbert, Sophia, Chuck, and Edmond),
> and
> > > 1
> > > > Abstention (Thomas).
> > > > 
> > > > So I'd request that the correct results be confirmed
> (after 
> > > > double-checking), and if relevant, the subsequent
> request of
> > > an
> > > > issue report on IGO names be reconsidered.
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > 
> > > > Mawaki
> > > > 
> > > > Item 5:  Motion to request issues report on protecting
> IGO
> > > names
> > > > and
> > > > abbreviations
> > > > 
> > > > Whereas, the GNSO Council recognizes the recommendation 
> > put forward 
> > > > by the IPC Constituency regarding possible measures in
> line
> > > with
> > > > WIPO-2 to
> > > > protect International Intergovernmental Organizations
> (IGO) names 
> > > > and abbreviations as domain names.
> > > > 
> > > > Whereas, the GNSO Council notes that measures to protect
> 
> > IGO names 
> > > > and abbreviations are requested in the GAC principles
> for New
> > > gTLDs.
> > > > 
> > > > Whereas, the GNSO Council notes that WIPO is the 
> > maintenance agency 
> > > > for the authoritative list of relevant IGO names and
> > > abbreviations
> > > > protected
> > > > under Article 6ter of the Paris Convention 
> > > > (http://www.wipo.int/article6ter/en/ ).
> > > > 
> > > > The GNSO Council requests that the staff produce an 
> > issues report on 
> > > > the policy issues associated with adequately handling
> disputes 
> > > > relating to IGO names and abbreviations as domain names.
> > > > 
> > > > The GNSO Council also requests that the staff liaise
> with
> > > WIPO
> > > > to
> > > > utilize its knowledge and experience of WIPO-2. 
> > > > 
> > > > Bruce,
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- "GNSO.SECRETARIAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
> > > > <gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > >> [To: ga[at]gnso.icann.org; announce[at]gnso.icann.org
> > > >> [To: liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org;
> > > council[at]gnso.icann.org]
> > > >>
> > > >> Please find the MP3 recording of the GNSO Council 
> > teleconference, 
> > > >> held on 24 May 2007 at:
> > > >>
> > > >> http://gnso-audio.icann.org/GNSO-Council-20070524.mp3
> > > >> http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#may
> > > >>
> > > >> Happy listening!
> > > >>
> > > >> Glen de Saint Géry
> > > >> GNSO Secretariat - ICANN
> > > >> gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org
> > > >> http://gnso.icann.org
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Glen de Saint Géry
> > > GNSO Secretariat - ICANN
> > > gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org
> > > http://gnso.icann.org
> > > 
> > 
> > 
>