ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]

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

Re: [council] Proposed Motion for draft Final Report on Whois and Voting in LA

Hi,
As I understand the motion we took on an end process, we allowed for any motion a council member wanted to make with the stipulation that we would vote on all of them before passing the final report on to the Board with the results of all motions included. If this motion succeeds in getting a supermajority, I see at least two things happening:
- the final report goes to the board indicating the supermajority result for no decision at this time.
- the GSNO council needs to figure out the manner in which it will process the information gained in 
   the studies.
If this motion does not achieve supermajority, it is still attached to the final report reporting its stauts and the board will know that this is the considered opinion of a set of council members.
The motions that are presented by the end of today are to be included with the draft final report and are to be discussed by the constituencies and the community so that the council members have guidance in our vote in LA.
I see no basis for refusing the motion given the end process we have adopted. 

thanks
a.



On 11 sep 2007, at 14.52, Ross Rader wrote:



Avri -
I'd like to formally object to this motion as being out of order on the grounds that it is fundamentally inconsistent with the formal Policy Development Process which stipulates that the GNSO Council must file a Board Report pursuant to the receipt of a Final Report.
We have allowed for tremendous flexibility in pursuing this work thus far - timelines have been stretched to the point of breaking, work processes have been bent to include the input of a very broad range of stakeholders and so on. Council must now close off this chapter in a manner consistent with the ICANN bylaws - which means voting on the reports and filing a Council Report to the Board.
If further study is desirable, the work should be pursued outside of the PDP. I would not object to the study component of this motion being pursued as a separate agenda item, but it cannot interfere with our bylaw requirements to vote on this issue and move forward. 

Rosette, Kristina wrote:

All,
Set forth below is a proposed motion for inclusion in the draft Final
Report and, if seconded, to be voted upon during the LA meeting. Kristina -*- 
WHEREAS:
1. The GNSO Council hereby accepts the Working Group report and
acknowledges the tremendous effort by Working Group participants and
ICANN staff. 2. The GNSO Council does not consider the Working Group report as an 
adequate basis for any implementation of the Operational Point of
Contact (OPOC) proposal, due to the inability to reach agreement on a
number of key issues identified in the charter of the Working Group. 3. The GNSO Council notes that no comprehensive, objective study has yet 
been made of key factual issues regarding the Whois system, and that
future ICANN policymaking could greatly benefit from the results of such 
a study.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The GNSO Council thanks all of the volunteers, consultants, staff and others who have participated in the GNSO's examination of Whois policy 
over the last four years.
2. Building on the work done in response to paragraph (c) of the GNSO
Council Resolution #3 of September 6, 2007, the Council requests that
ICANN staff take the necessary steps to proceed with a comprehensive,
objective study on the issues identified by the Whois Working Group, by 
the Governmental Advisory Committee in its statement of principles on
Whois, and by the Council. These issues include the characteristics of 
gTLD registrants, the uses and abuses of Whois data, and a review and
analysis of the different proxy services available today. Specifically, the Council directs the staff to present for its review a draft Request 
for Proposals for such a study, including a proposed budget and
timeline, and a methodology for outreach to knowledgeable parties,
within 90 days from the date of adoption of this resolution. 3. The GNSO Council will take the results of this study, once completed, into account in deciding on the next steps in Whois policy development. 


--
Regards,

Ross Rader
Director, Retail Services
Tucows Inc.

http://www.domaindirect.com
t. 416.538.5492
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>