RE: [council] Point for Discussion

[Ute Decker <udecker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I certainly support Philip's point that we need to get past this point.  
Getting additional advice from John seems the logical next step forward.

Ute

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: 12 July 2007 12:51
To: Philip Sheppard; GNSO Council
Subject: RE: [council] Point for Discussion

Good point Philip.  I wonder if it would be helpful to ask John for additional 
advice regarding what we are considering and how best to pursue it, assuming of 
course there is interest by other constituencies besides the RyC.

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."


________________________________
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Philip Sheppard
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 3:41 AM
To: 'GNSO Council'
Subject: RE: [council] Point for Discussion
Chuck raises a good point.
The current situation is a disenfranchisement and needs correcting.
However, the proposal does not get us over the by-laws situation which has 
brought us to the current state of misery.

The by-laws state - as they have done more or less since ICANN began:
"Members of the GNSO Council may participate in a meeting of the GNSO Council 
through use of ..... ; provided that (a) all members participating in such a 
meeting can speak to and hear one another, ...... (c) ICANN adopts and 
implements means of verifying that (x) a person participating in such a meeting 
is a member of the GNSO Council or other person entitled to participate in the 
meeting and (y) all actions of, or votes by, the GNSO Council are taken or cast 
only by the members of the GNSO Council and not persons who are not members".

It is this provision that Louis Touton interpreted to ALLOW proxy votes.
It is this provision that John Jeffreys interpreted to DENY proxy  votes.

Until we change this by-law , we are sunk and disenfranchised.

Philip