ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

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

  • To: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [council] RE: [council] RE: [council] RE: [council] Re: Council vote on by-laws (from Stéphane)
  • From: Stephvg2 <stephvg2@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 16:51:35 +0200
  • Cc: Tony Holmes <tonyarholmes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:references:message-id:from:to :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer :mime-version:subject:date:cc; bh=TjvjhuKN+ZJQjBvJjjkyX3eCehjtv3ElxgSRNF+l/dg=; b=RxwBurd+CyEXOHdrSAsnivLxNBb4R5KkusBJNr5SZA8Yxuv44talltgCOTYezFvSqT MFt/lL1mHEz/4rp+oUrKyYY7yIwSQxAOvXbKPDYydhw9dNStKIsGjv1yF6KKhGFT5iHt qI40NYFb6RdKprrxPachOfhDP0Ft+fJNCnRbE=
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=references:message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:mime-version:subject:date:cc; b=tBojfMqnVINgPjzRha64IJ08UDNYb6uABQsmxtw4QEYbEUbDmxgyoomuR/J+4UdmhI U348o8BPNdIthIyJaIm4udpR4iDfAM0KzEulqJ9FRgCwZXSnrm/b4MTsRQkIzlKNem02 jY44Sm+TYMqruI8m3QGb2EML/wulyn4K9COSc=
  • In-reply-to: <046F43A8D79C794FA4733814869CDF0702B8DC6B@dul1wnexmb01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • References: <CCF65E35-74DA-4426-AA4A-6EDCB0D2D1BC@graduateinstitute.ch> <200907131242.n6DCgYaj001274@pechora4.lax.icann.org> <046F43A8D79C794FA4733814869CDF0702B8DC6B@dul1wnexmb01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Hi Chuck,

Is there a Time limit for people who abstained to respond with a reason why they did so?



Envoyé de mon iPhone

Le 13 juil. 2009 à 15:16, "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :

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.


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?


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?


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.



Envoyé de mon iPhone

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


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.


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


1 Vote against:

Cyril Chua (IPC) 1 vote


Kristina Rosette (IPC) Statement

William Drake (NCUC) Statement

Not present:

Philip Sheppard (CBUC)

Anthony Harris (ISPC)



-------- 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'"



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


this request is about transparency and      relevance.

It is a formal request from the BC.


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