<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[council] RE: [council] RE: [council] RE: [council] Re: Council vote on by-laws (from Stéphane)
Nothing has been communicated to the Board regarding the vote. As Avri
communicated in our call last week, each person who abstained was to be given
an opportunity to confirm that their reason for abstaining was recorded
accurately. Glen sent a draft of the action on the motion with proposed
abstention language to the applicable Councilors and we are still waiting for
responses.
Chuck
________________________________
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tony Holmes
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 8:42 AM
To: 'William Drake'
Cc: 'GNSO Council List'
Subject: [council] RE: [council] RE: [council] Re: Council vote on
by-laws (from Stéphane)
Well, if that's the case and the Board know everything anyway, then why
bother to have a vote at all???
But as there was a vote, I would appreciate knowing what if anything
has happened since.
________________________________
From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 13 July 2009 13:22
To: Tony Holmes
Cc: 'GNSO Council List'
Subject: Re: [council] RE: [council] Re: Council vote on by-laws (from
Stéphane)
Perhaps we should create a drafting team? Or a team to draft a charter
for a drafting team? We could be ready to report the vote in August...
After all the public pronouncements and back channel communications, is
there really any chance that the board does not know where the constituencies
stand on the bylaws? Why spend time negotiating how to package and spoon feed
them things they already know? Why not just report the vote per usual and move
on?
Bill
On Jul 13, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Tony Holmes wrote:
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
***********************************************************
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|