ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [council] Point for Discussion (proxy voting)

  • To: Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [council] Point for Discussion (proxy voting)
  • From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 11:42:44 +0200
  • Cc: "'GNSO Council'" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • In-reply-to: <001601c7d4e7$d191b6b0$e601a8c0@PSEVO>
  • References: <001601c7d4e7$d191b6b0$e601a8c0@PSEVO>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx


I am not sure if we will have time, but can put it under any other business and if everything goes quickly on contractual conditions and Whois, then we may get to it. Otherwise I can carry over to the next meeting. If there is no real discussion, it should be possible to get it done at this meeting.


On 2 aug 2007, at 11.30, Philip Sheppard wrote:

Do we have time for this on the 9 aug agenda ?

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner- council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Philip
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 10:06 AM
To: 'GNSO Council'
Subject: RE: [council] Point for Discussion (proxy voting)

I support Ross here.
The simplest method of proxy voting will be best.
Responsibility should lie with the Council member only to vote.
If they are remiss, so be it.
And of course if we introduce proxy votes then it would apply to all Council members.

I propose a simple resolution at our next meeting:

"The Council would like to introduce a system of proxy voting.
Council requests the ICANN General Counsel to confirm EITHER that this is possible under the current by-laws and if not advise what by-law change would be needed to enable it"


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>