[council] RE: [council] Re: Council vote on by-laws (from Stéphane)

["Tony Holmes" <tonyarholmes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Does that mean we can all indicate how we would have voted to the Board?

 

Avri - could you provide can update of where we are with this. Have you
communicated anything at all to the Board regarding this vote yet?

 

Tony

 

  _____  

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of William Drake
Sent: 13 July 2009 11:56
To: GNSO Council List
Subject: [council] Re: Council vote on by-laws (from Stéphane)

 

 

 

Begin forwarded message:





From: Stephvg2 <stephvg2@xxxxxxxxx>

Date: July 13, 2009 12:49:25 PM GMT+02:00

To: William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Cc: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>

Subject: Re: [council] Council vote on by-laws

 

I agree that Tim's approach is sensible. But if we're aiming for maximum
transparency, I would also like it be recorded that in my message before the
meeting stating I would be unable to participate, I said I would vote in
favor. This may also be useful info for the Board.

I'm not sure I can post to the Council list from this, my secondary email
address, so perhaps one of you would be kind enough to forward this message
to the Council list.

Thanks,

Stéphane

Envoyé de mon iPhone

Le 13 juil. 2009 à 11:03, William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
a écrit :




 

Hi

 

Avri's proposed approach is sensible and would be NCUC's preference.
However, if there's overwhelming sentiment that differentiated reporting is
needed, it would be better to respect board members' intelligence and
dispense with the transparent spinning.  Tim's approach would be preferable
in that context.

 

Bill

 

 

On Jul 10, 2009, at 5:42 PM, Tim Ruiz wrote:

 

 

Would it be okay to report the vote something like this:

 

13 Votes in favor:

Tim Ruiz (RrC) 2 votes

Chuck Gomes (RyC) 2 votes

Avri Doria (NCA) 1 vote

etc.

 

1 Vote against:

Cyril Chua (IPC) 1 vote

 

Abstained:

Kristina Rosette (IPC) Statement

William Drake (NCUC) Statement

 

Not present:

Philip Sheppard (CBUC)

Anthony Harris (ISPC)

etc.

 

Tim

 

-------- Original Message --------

Subject: Re: [council] Council vote on by-laws

From: "Anthony Harris" <harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date: Fri, July 10, 2009 9:33 am

To: "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>, "'Council GNSO'"

<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

 

 

Avri,

 

Perhaps, in this sunset of the GNSO as we

have known it, you may see your way to

accomodating this rather simple request from

three of the existing constituencies.

 

I beleive that all of us are trying to get the

restructuring process "right", and certain

issues are important to some rather than to

others. I think the Board deserves to be

aware of this.

 

Thank you.

 

Tony Harris

 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>

To: "'Council GNSO'" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 10:28 AM

Subject: [council] Council vote on by-laws

 

 

 

 

Avri,

this request is about transparency and relevance.

It is a formal request from the BC.

Philip

 

 

 

 

 

***********************************************************

William J. Drake

Senior Associate

Centre for International Governance

Graduate Institute of International and

Development Studies

Geneva, Switzerland

william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html

***********************************************************