ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

[council] FW: Council meeting

  • To: <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [council] FW: Council meeting
  • From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 14:29:24 -0400
  • Cc: <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: Act2wvJCTz8y1fH0TdC26ilLjgFw1AACqNyQ
  • Thread-topic: Council meeting

Please note that Philip Sheppard, OSC Chair, will not be able to participate in 
our Council meeting today as previously plan.  In lieu of his attendance, he 
asked me to forward the following message.  It was anticipated that Philip 
would participate in two agenda items: "Item 5: Voting Procedures when 
Councilors are absent &/or must abstain" and "Item 6: Disclosure of Interest 


-----Original Message-----
From: philip.sheppard@xxxxxx [mailto:philip.sheppard@xxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 1:09 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck
Cc: Glen de Saint Géry; Ray Fassett
Subject: RE: Council meeting

Please forward this to Council.
Chances are I will not join the call tonight for various reasons.
Ray will anyway be in a better position to explain how his group reached
the rules they did and what eventualities they tried to foresee.

Let me share some more high level thoughts.
1. OSC role
I regard the OSC as a check on the work of the sub groups more about
process than content. It is also a chance to have a second set of eyes
review a proposal. But there is nothing like actually using a set of rules
to expose their strengths and weaknesses.

2. Objective of the GNSO rules of procedure
The rules meet essentially one of two requirements.
a) Improve the efficiency of Council.
b) Improve the integrity of Council.

3. Good rule or bad rule?
The rule must be proportionate to its objective. If to apply it is
disproportionately onerous it should be changed.

1. Having re read the rule on proxies and abstentions and read the Council
list they look to me to be disproportionate. The graphic heroically
produced by staff underlines their complexity. The current rules may not
be adding to the efficiency of Council. If true change them.

2. The rules on declarations of interest need special consideration. These
rules are there for the second integrity objective. Council is by its
nature a nest of vested interests. Transparency via declarations of
interest is the solution. Here I would apply a harder test of
proportionately. Council should be expected to make extra efforts in
pursuit of being a body with integrity. On re reading the amended rules, I
believe they are simpler and my instinct would be to try them out for a
few months before seeking any change. (By way of record keeping there
should be one web page logging current SOIs  and specific DOIs per Council

Hope this helps.
OSC Chair

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