Re: [council] Chairs' List and Chairs' Meeting in SF

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

What's clear to you may not always be clear to everyone else. That shouldn't be 
hard for you to understand, and attempting to do so might prove more helpful in 
advancing your point of view than showing impatience at those who do not share 
or understand it.

Stéphane 

Le 20 janv. 2011 à 20:23, Tim Ruiz a écrit :

> Hard to imagine that it isn't clear. An "ICANN mailing list for the GNSO 
> leadership" versus "lunch"? A "meeting of the Chairs of the SO/ACs called by 
> the CEO of ICANN" versus a "hat"? I really don't think it's all that hard.
> 
> Tim  
>  
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [council] Chairs' List and Chairs' Meeting in SF
> From: Stéphane_Van_Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu, January 20, 2011 1:04 pm
> To: "Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "GNSO Council " <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Tim, where do you draw the line between what's part of the normal day-to-day 
> management of the Council and what needs to be voted on through a motion?
> 
> I do not know how to classify "what we have for lunch" on the one hand and 
> "what mailing list we should be creating" on the other?
> 
> Stéphane
> 
> Le 20 janv. 2011 à 19:14, Tim Ruiz a écrit :
> 
> > 
> > I agree in part with Rosemary and Bill, that there was not enough time
> > between decisions on these issues for everyone to voice their opinion,
> > or even give it much thought. But I think the real problem is because
> > the appropriate way for the Council to act is through resolution. The
> > straw polling of the Council for these kinds of things just does not
> > work.
> > 
> > A straw poll on what two main dishes we want for a lunch, or what kind
> > of hat to present a departing Councilor is fine. But otherwise, I
> > believe we should act through resolution only. That will alleviate any
> > confusion as to whether this or that actually had the support of the
> > Council, and it makes sure that all Councilors have the opportunity to
> > be fully informed and appropriately consider the decision.
> > 
> > Regarding the two recent issues, I believe there is still time for such
> > appropriate action. Regardless of how I feel about these issues, I do
> > believe the will of the majority of the Council should be the deciding
> > factor. Acting through resolution will ensure that.
> > 
> > When time does not allow for acting through resolution, I don't think
> > there is any one right way to deal with it except that if pursued there
> > should be no representation that it was a Council action or the
> > Council's will in any way. For example, Stephane doesn't need our
> > permission to arrive two days early to SF and chat with other attendees
> > even if they happen to be Chairs of other SO/ACs, but if he does he
> > cannot do so "AS" Chair of the Council or in any way imply that his
> > actions or statements represent the Council. It would concern me that
> > ICANN would likely end up paying for two additional nights. If it were
> > me, I would not let that happen. I guess that is for Stephane to decide.
> > 
> > In regards to the list, there is no reason that it cannot wait for
> > appropriate resolution and action of the Council.
> > 
> > Tim
> > 
> > 
>