ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

RE: [council] Council meeting today

  • To: "Council GNSO" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [council] Council meeting today
  • From: "Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:44:45 -0700
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Reply-to: "Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: Web-Based Email 5.0.28

The RrC Reps were okay putting this off since we needed some time to
review it with our members. That done, we are prepared to vote. The
comment period is for the Board, and the Council's vote on the bylaws
will be considered by the Board along with the comments.


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [council] Council meeting today
From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, July 09, 2009 3:21 pm
To: <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Council GNSO" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Let's remember that the sole purpose of this meeting was to act on the
proposed Bylaws changes.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh
> Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 1:54 PM
> To: 'Council GNSO'
> Subject: [council] Council meeting today
> Hello,
> I cannot make the call today as more pressing matters have 
> arisen. If this is subject to proxy voting, then I will vote 
> 'no' on the motion, since we still do not have a complete 
> document to review and vote upon, and the document we do have 
> is still out for public comment for another 20 days.
> While that public comment forum is very confusing, in any 
> event we should never be voting on a document that is out for 
> public comment, until comments have been reviewed and 
> integrated as appropriate, right?
> Thanks,
> Mike
> Mike Rodenbaugh
> Rodenbaugh Law
> 548 Market Street
> San Francisco, CA 94104
> +1.415.738.8087
> www.rodenbaugh.com

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