RE: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Is it just me or should the 2nd 'whereas' be the 1st 'resolved'?

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 Mike Rodenbaugh
> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 8:09 PM
> To: GNSO Council
> Subject: RE: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting 
> September 6 2007
> 
> The BC also had a motion pending, seconded by the IPC.  We 
> will rescind that motion in favor of this compromise motion 
> that incorporates BC, IPC and GAC request for an additional 
> factual study, and requests updates on ongoing ICANN studies, 
> to incorporate that information into the process suggested by 
> Avri's motion.
> 
> Please see attached.  I am not sure if Avri would consider 
> this a friendly amendment to her motion.  But otherwise we 
> suggest it as an alternative.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Mike Rodenbaugh
> 
> Sr. Legal Director
> 
> Yahoo! Inc.
> 
>  
> 
> NOTE:  This message may be protected by attorney-client 
> and/or work product privileges, if you are not the intended 
> recipient then please delete this message and all attachments 
> and notify me as soon as possible.  Thanks.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 3:30 PM
> To: GNSO Council
> Subject: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6
> 2007
> 
> Hi,
> 
> As part of tomorrow's meeting, we have two motions, with one 
> amendment on the agenda after the gTLD decision.
> I have enclosed those in this email for reference.
> Both of these were originally proposed a week before the 
> meeting or more.
> 
> thank
> a.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> Proposed Motion on GA mailing list rules (submitted 25 Aug)
> 
> ----
> 
> Whereas the GA list sent a request to the GNSO council for 
> approval of its new list rules,
> 
> and whereas the GNSO council is responsible for managing open 
> forums, in the form of mailing lists, and the GA list is one 
> such open forum,
> 
> Resolved:
> 
> The GNSO chair will send a message to the GA List stating the 
> following:
> 
> The GNSO council acknowledges the GA List's charter request 
> and thanks the particpants for consulting with the GNSO 
> council on this issue.
> 
> Given the council's by-law responsibilities for the 
> moderation of the GA list, the council encourages the GA 
> List's movement toward self moderation and supports the GA 
> List in implementing the mailing list rules (found at 
> http://www.geolang.com/draftGAListRules5.htm) indicated in 
> Section 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 with the following exception in section 2:
> 
> 
> > The Announce list is available for official pronouncements only.
> > Emanating from the Secretariat of the NC and/or the Chair of the GA
> >
> 
> The Announce list is and should remain solely for the sole 
> use of the GNSO Secretariat for notifying the subscribers of 
> GNSO and other ICANN informational items.
> 
> With regard to the organizational sections of the charter, 
> specifically sections 6, 8, and 9, the GNSO council accepts 
> that members participating
>   the list are free to determine their own organizational 
> structure, with the following exceptions in section 8 on elections:
> 
> 
> >  An election is usually held near the end of the term of office for 
> > the chair of the General Assembly. The exact time is decided by the 
> > outgoing Chair and the Chair of the GNSO.
> >
> 
> The GNSO council, and its chair, cannot accept any 
> responsibility for the internal governance of an 
> organizational movement on the GA List at this time and 
> restricts the council's actions to issues concerning the 
> moderation of the GA List as determined by the by-laws.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Proposed motion for end process for Whois TF and WG to be 
> voted on September 6 2007  (proposed Aug 30)
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Whereas the Whois Task force report has not yet been voted on 
> as required by the by-laws,
> 
> Whereas the Whois WG was created to collect further 
> information as defined in its terms of reference,
> 
> Whereas the Whois WG has now completed its work,
> 
> Whereas almost 6 months have gone by since the release of the 
> Whois Task force report,
> 
> Resolved:
> 
> A - The GNSO council acknowledges the report and  thanks the 
> members and the chair of the Working group for their efforts.
> 
> B - The GNSO Council should now complete this work on Whois 
> and make its report to the ICANN community and to the ICANN Board.
> 
> C - In order to complete the work the following steps will be taken as
> scheduled:
> 
> 1 - Staff will produce a Draft Final Report that references 
> the TF report,
>      the WG charter and the WG report by and which includes 
> an overall description
>      of the process by September 13.  This overview should 
> include the text of
>      motions to be voted on at the end of this process.
> 
> 
> 2 - This report will be sent out for Constituency Statement 
> Review on September 13.
>      Constituencies will be asked to follow the by-laws on 
> constituency statements.
>      Specifically  (Quote from by-laws)
> 
>          1. Constituency Statements.
>          The Representatives will each be responsible for soliciting
>          the position of their constituencies, at a minimum, and other
>          comments as each Representative deems appropriate, regarding
>          the issue under consideration. This position and 
> other comments,
>          as applicable, should be submitted in a formal 
> statement to the
>          task force chair (each, a "Constituency Statement") 
> within thirty-five
>          (35) calendar days after initiation of the PDP.
>          Every Constituency Statement shall include at least the
> following:
> 
>          (i) If a Supermajority Vote was reached, a clear 
> statement of the
>              constituency's position on the issue;
> 
>          (ii) If a Supermajority Vote was not reached, a 
> clear statement of
>              all positions espoused by constituency members;
> 
>          (iii) A clear statement of how the constituency 
> arrived at its position(s).
>                Specifically, the statement should detail 
> specific constituency meetings,
>                teleconferences, or other means of 
> deliberating an issue, and a list of
>                all members who participated or otherwise 
> submitted their views;
> 
>          (iv) An analysis of how the issue would affect the 
> constituency, including any
>               financial impact on the constituency; and
> 
>           (v) An analysis of the period of time that would 
> likely be necessary to
>               implement the policy.
> 
>           (end Quote)
> 
>       Final Date for for updated statement: October 4, 2007
>                which is 35 days from the meeting when the 
> Whois WG report was discussed
> 
> 3 - Staff will Incorporate Constituency comments into the 
> Final Report by October 11, 2007
> 
> 4 - Staff is requested to produce staff implementation notes 
> by October 15
> 
> 5 - Community Public Comment on Final Report: October 15 - 
> November 6, 2007
> 
> 6 - A Public and Council Discussion will be held during the 
> LA Public Meeting
> 
> 7 - Final vote on first GNSO Council meeting after November 6, 2007
> 
> 
> ---------------------------
> 
> Proposed Amendment From Ross Rader to the Whois end process motion:
> 
> 
> - that "November 6, 2007" in step 5 be replaced with "October 
> 31, 2007"
> 
> - that "after November 6, 2007" in step 7 be replaced with 
> "during the LA Public Meeting".
> 
> 
>