<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[council] Re: [gnso-osc] RE: GNSO Council Proxy Procedures
- To: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [council] Re: [gnso-osc] RE: GNSO Council Proxy Procedures
- From: Olga Cavalli <olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 05:49:02 -0700
- Cc: Council GNSO <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=iiHuzz/SQem8LJEePcA0ktRbdJwVzeO3d1h/HRAIlMM=; b=PuTFr0ix2bFlm2EVvx4qdYeSmgcSdcxKynnYidWkOntWWhGWRBJeHQPMlMKqcJa+yh V2pR+La6LVkEsoE1g4oso1Vobce54/ovJFuRrhofFgK0zk+8RKz5Dgzax7TgBeLl0ha6 V93jrFXkWNXwvCpp3aGxsT0Um3p1QGpSXD5so=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=Aq14PnCRxKZOr7DS18NEaCOJj8ApBpl8dgh1qv8/fuvYPOGYK55TEym4ElQqSO8CBx rCJ6b/1qTAmWbMoPP0TKTzw67nmelwJdQC9UtFQ2Vi/+j1T1yzwsivWlokeFd2pAP5WO SZTfbqlKoBmfivGufauSL/+nS24Gn7SGhGih4=
- In-reply-to: <6D7CB416-47DF-4396-A771-8A5ABD43CABB@indom.com>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <BANLkTime2VaNQTdPEzL_LAjZ58wNYUsCmw@mail.gmail.com> <6D7CB416-47DF-4396-A771-8A5ABD43CABB@indom.com>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Stephane,
I said I would confirm on Tuesday.
Best
Olga
2011/4/5 Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
> Thanks Olga,
>
> Forwarding this to the Chairs list for their info, as this was discussed in
> our planning meeting yesterday and the understanding was that you would not
> be at Thursday's meeting.
>
> Good to hear that you will be, thanks for that.
>
> Stéphane
>
>
>
> Début du message réexpédié :
>
> *De : *Olga Cavalli <olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx>
> *Date : *5 avril 2011 14:06:05 HAEC
> *À : *Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
> *Cc : *"Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ken Bour <
> ken.bour@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>,
> gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx, Robert Hoggarth <robert.hoggarth@xxxxxxxxx>, Julie
> Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>, liz.gasster@xxxxxxxxx
> *Objet : **Rép : [gnso-osc] RE: GNSO Council Proxy Procedures*
>
> Hi,
> I plan to attend the conf call on Thursday so I can be the proxi for
> Andrei.
> Regards
> Olga
>
> 2011/4/5 Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
>
>> On Chuck's last point, I am not sure that would be consistent with the way
>> this works for non NCA councillors, as proxies can only be given within the
>> same SG, they do not cover the entire house.
>>
>> I think we have to be careful not to create a situation where the NCAs
>> enjoy benefits that elected councillors do not.
>>
>> Stéphane
>>
>>
>>
>> Le 5 avr. 2011 à 01:03, Gomes, Chuck a écrit :
>>
>> The current GOP limit of one proxy per Council NCA follows the same
>> limitation that is true for each SG Councilor. If, for example, the RySG
>> had two Councilors absent for a meeting (quorum rules notwithstanding), the
>> attending Councilor could still exercise only one proxy vote per motion. The
>> other absent Councilor votes would be recorded as “absent.” *[Gomes,
>> Chuck] * If it is important to maintain this, then we could just allow an
>> NCA to give the proxy to any Councilor in the applicable house.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|