ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

RE: [council] Motion and document deadlines added to GNSO calendar

  • To: "GNSO Council " <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [council] Motion and document deadlines added to GNSO calendar
  • From: "Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:35:30 -0700
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Reply-to: "Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: Web-Based Email 5.3.05

<html><body><span style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000; 
font-size:10pt;"><div>Personally, Yes and Yes. The Councilors represent their 
SG/Cs. In some cases that may be able to be done on shorter notice - a well 
known/worn issue being revisited for example, or a motion of thanks and/or 
appreciation. In some cases Councilors may be able to vet something 
sufficiently on Constituency day prior to the GNSO meeting.<BR></div>
<div>I am not talking about amendments, or even alternate motions in some 
cases. If the original motion has been on the table long enough, the Councilors 
often have a good enough sense of their SG/C to feel comfortable taking 
<div>Right now, we allow anyone to ask&nbsp;that a motion be deferred at least 
once. The result is that it actually goes on longer that it would if we 
required a 14 day window prior to the meeting, and&nbsp;often to&nbsp;others it 
makes those asking for&nbsp;deferment&nbsp;look like&nbsp;they are at 
best&nbsp;procrastinators and at worse trying to block progress.</div>
<div>Tim </div>
<BLOCKQUOTE id=replyBlockquote style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; 
MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: 
verdana" webmail="1">
<DIV id=wmQuoteWrapper>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: Re: 
[council] Motion and document deadlines added to GNSO<BR>calendar<BR>From: 
Stéphane_Van_Gelder &lt;<a 
 Thu, January 20, 2011 1:12 pm<BR>To: "Tim Ruiz" &lt;<a 
href="mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx";>tim@xxxxxxxxxxx</a>&gt;<BR>Cc: "Margie Milam" 
&lt;<a href="mailto:Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx";>Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx</a>&gt;, 
"GNSO Council"<BR>&lt;<a 
href="mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx</a>&gt;<BR><BR>As a 
reminder, the suggestion is to extend the deadline for motions prior to an Open 
Council meeting only.<BR><BR>Are you saying you believe the Council should 
never consider "fresh" motions at these meetings? If so, is the rationale that 
the ICANN meeting week is too time intensive to give people time to properly 
consider motions?<BR><BR>Stéphane<BR><BR>Le 20 janv. 2011 à 19:18, Tim Ruiz a 
écrit :<BR><BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; Personally, I believe no motion should be 
considered at the meeting<BR>&gt; immediately following when it is made. It 
should almost always wait<BR>&gt; until the following one. BUT, if one is going 
to be considered at the<BR>&gt; very next meeting after it is made, the Council 
should have had at least<BR>&gt; 14 days to consider and vet it.<BR>&gt; 
<BR>&gt; Tim <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; -------- Original Message --------<BR>&gt; 
Subject: RE: [council] Motion and document deadlines added to GNSO<BR>&gt; 
calendar<BR>&gt; From: Margie Milam &lt;<a 
Date: Thu, January 20, 2011 10:59 am<BR>&gt; To: Tim Ruiz &lt;<a 
href="mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx";>tim@xxxxxxxxxxx</a>&gt;, GNSO Council &lt;<a 
<BR>&gt; Hi Tim,<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; The GNSO Council meets approximately every 3 
weeks. If a 14 day rule is<BR>&gt; applied, motions would need to be brought 
during the one week period<BR>&gt; after the last GNSO Council meeting. Would 
that leave enough time for<BR>&gt; dialogue between meetings among councilors 
and allow for sufficient<BR>&gt; consultations with their respective 
SG/C's?<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; Margie<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; -----Original 
Message-----<BR>&gt; From: <a 
href="mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx</a> [<a 
 On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz<BR>&gt; Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 3:26 
PM<BR>&gt; To: GNSO Council<BR>&gt; Subject: RE: [council] Motion and document 
deadlines added to GNSO<BR>&gt; calendar<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; This is 
basically 13-14 days. Why not just make it 14 days prior to a<BR>&gt; meeting. 
Then we don't have to worry about changes in the way ICANN<BR>&gt; schedules 
its meetings, and it's simpler to understand.<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; Would a motion 
to change that be sufficient, or is more needed?<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; Tim <BR>&gt; 
<BR>&gt; -------- Original Message --------<BR>&gt; Subject: Re: [council] 
Motion and document deadlines added to GNSO<BR>&gt; calendar<BR>&gt; From: 
Stéphane_Van_Gelder &lt;<a 
 Date: Wed, January 19, 2011 8:29 am<BR>&gt; To: "Neuman, Jeff" &lt;<a 
href="mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx";>Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx</a>&gt;<BR>&gt; Cc: 
GNSO Council &lt;<a 
<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; I like it. Others?<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; Stéphane<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; 
Le 18 janv. 2011 à 16:00, Neuman, Jeff a écrit :<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt;&gt; One idea 
that some have had is to make the motions deadline before an ICANN meeting 8 
days prior to the weekend session as opposed to 8 days prior to the Council 
meeting. This would give ample time to discuss the motions during the weekend 
and during constituency/stakeholder day. This would make the motions deadline 
March 4th as opposed to March 8th (if my math is correct).<BR>&gt;&gt; 
<BR>&gt;&gt; Should we try that for this next meeting to test it out and see if 
that works?<BR>&gt;&gt; <BR>&gt;&gt; Jeffrey J. Neuman<BR>&gt;&gt; Neustar, 
Inc. / Vice President, Law &amp; Policy<BR>&gt;&gt; <BR>&gt;&gt; <BR>&gt;&gt; 
The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this 
e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying 
of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original 
message.<BR>&gt;&gt; <BR>&gt;&gt; <BR>&gt;&gt; <BR>&gt;&gt; -----Original 
Message-----<BR>&gt;&gt; From: <a 
<BR>&gt;&gt; [<a 
 On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder<BR>&gt;&gt; Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 
9:44 AM<BR>&gt;&gt; To: GNSO Council<BR>&gt;&gt; Subject: [council] Motion and 
document deadlines added to GNSO <BR>&gt;&gt; calendar<BR>&gt;&gt; <BR>&gt;&gt; 
<BR>&gt;&gt; Councillors,<BR>&gt;&gt; <BR>&gt;&gt; FYI, following a suggestion 
from Jeff on our last Council Leaders' call, we have looked at adding the 
deadline for submitting motions and documents on our master 
calendar.<BR>&gt;&gt; <BR>&gt;&gt; The idea is, as the meetings tend to roll 
into each other and it's easy to loose sight of deadlines, to give us better 
clarity about when motions need to be submitted.<BR>&gt;&gt; <BR>&gt;&gt; Glen 
has implemented this idea and you can see the result on the calendar page (<a 
 next deadline is shown on Jan 29.<BR>&gt;&gt; <BR>&gt;&gt; I hope this is 
useful to everyone.<BR>&gt;&gt; <BR>&gt;&gt; Thanks,<BR>&gt;&gt; <BR>&gt;&gt; 
Stéphane<BR>&gt;&gt; <BR>&gt;&gt; P.S.: There was talk in Cartagena of 
lengthening motion deadlines before a Public Council meeting. Is there still an 
interest in looking at this?<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; 

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