ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

RE: [council] Re: Draft Schedule for GNSO related meetings in LA

  • To: "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx>, "Council GNSO" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [council] Re: Draft Schedule for GNSO related meetings in LA
  • From: "Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 11:28:08 -0400
  • In-reply-to: <983E1FD7-FF44-4048-B119-4AB2B4A68BF9@psg.com>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AcgSYWKO8RSCv23+RvGcZP+5QZSFCwAAOr+g
  • Thread-topic: [council] Re: Draft Schedule for GNSO related meetings in LA

I am not in favor of voting during our weekend meetings on such short
Although I will arrive on Friday night, it would not surprise me if that
was not true for all Councilors, and that some of our colleagues may
have made travel arrangements based on the reasonable assumption that
the working meetings were just that.  ( Personally, I would prefer that
we have final agendas set no less than 30 days before the first
"working" meeting so that we can make the most inexpensive flight
Further, the IPC has scheduled the majority of its decision-making for
the constituency meeting on Tuesday.  While I understand that we could
stop just short of voting, it seems likely to me that views may change
in the intervening days such that time spent during the working meetings
may not be most efficiently utilized.


        From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
        Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 10:58 AM
        To: Council GNSO
        Subject: [council] Re: Draft Schedule for GNSO related meetings
in LA

        A few responses:

        On 19 okt 2007, at 10.34, Philip Sheppard wrote:

                I do understand the mess we are in with no decisions
taken at the last call and a Council
                meeting now blended in with a public forum.

        I do not beleive we are in a mess.  I am sorry you do.  I
believe we have a lot of work to do.  And we have to do it as
appropriately as possible.

                However, it is not appropriate to use the Sat and Sun
meetings as substitute Council

        I do not understand why it is not appropriate for these to _be_
council meetings.  There is no rule that says we can have only 1 meeting
while in a face to face meeting.  I think that we can use our time as
profitably as possible and if that involves having more hours of
meeting, I see no rules that bar it.

        Now if most of the council members believe that it is
inappropriate, that is a different story.

                Firstly, our by-laws require an agenda and 7 days
notice: ie certainty not maybe it is,

                maybe it isn't.

        We have an agenda as of now and there is still more then a week
before each of those meetings.  and I did mention that any motions would
have to be submitted in advance other then minor ones (e.g. we vote to
thank X for Y. or we need a sub group to do draft Z).  As is always the

                Secondly, the Sat and Sun meetings come BEFORE
Constituency meetings: surely the reason for
                delaying the decision making at our last call, was to be
able to discuss in the

        Yes, and i was not suggesting we make any major decisions that
have never been discussed before.  On each possible decisions, as was
done in the past, the council members can indicate whether they are
ready or not for a vote and whether they need to take the issue back to
their constituencies.  So I am not suggesting anything different then
what we have done in the past.  And if no one suggests any significant
motions in time for the meeting, then there won't be any significant
motions that might need constituency pre-discussion. 

        I am aware that some decisions are of such a major importance
that council members need to go back to the constituencies before they
can vote.  On the other hand, there are other decisions, e.g. to
constitute an ad hoc group to do something,  that may be possible for a
council member to vote on without returning for specific instructions. 

                Thirdly, whereas I am all in favour or improving
outreach in the public forum, it is not
                acceptable to compromise the integrity of our Council
meeting as a result. Either we can
                achieve what Council must or we cannot. If the new
format stops Council functioning, the new
                format needs revisiting.

        Are you suggesting that it does compromise the council's
integrity?  Certainly after we have tried this format once, we should
review it and can either fine tune it or change.  We are doing this as a
response to comments that were made by the commenting community, so I
suggest we see if it works before we decide that it compromises our
integrity.  And yes, a change in one place, may require some concomitant
changes in other places.

                So, to end on my usual positive note.
                By all means lets use Sat and Sun to discuss the issues,
but with no votes.

        I would like to hear other council member's opinions on this
last point (on any of the points really, but especially on this last

                Then, the time needed on the actual Council meeting (Wed
Oct 31) can be short and sweet to
                do the voting.

        Well we still need to listen to what is said by the community
and then consider what has been said before voting.



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