Re: [council] Motion for IRTP-B Final Report and Recommendations

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

Thanks Jonathan,

If a motion is made before the time limit and properly seconded, we are obliged 
to consider it.

However in this case, it is my understanding that the motion was simply put 
forward for discussion purposes, but has not been made yet. So a second is not 
needed at this time, although yours is duly noted for when we come to consider 
the motion (assuming it hasn't changed significantly by then, in which case I 
would ask you to reconfirm your second).

Thanks,

Stéphane



Le 8 juin 2011 à 17:21, Jonathan Robinson a écrit :

> 
> I understand that it may not be practical to vote on this tomorrow.
> 
> However, it is sitting without a second and so I am happy to second it.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
> Sent: 01 June 2011 22:13
> To: GNSO Council
> Subject: [council] Motion for IRTP-B Final Report and Recommendations
> 
> A proposed motion for the final report and recommendations of the IRTP-B WG 
> is attached in both doc and txt formats.
> 
> Thanks to Marika for putting this together. I made a few edits because my 
> personal opinion is that recommendations 8 and 9 are not fully baked yet. 
> While I have faith in Staff's ability to do what is asked of it in those two 
> recommendations, I do not feel it is appropriate. There are policy aspects of 
> those two recommendations that are yet unaddressed.
> Using an implementation plan to flesh them out is not appropriate or fair to 
> either the community or to Staff.
> 
> As Liaison to this WG I should have caught that sooner, but I am not sure the 
> WG would have gotten any further with them either way. As a result I have 
> left them mentioned in Resolve(D) but have not yet had time to ocnsider how 
> to frame them. 
> 
> In any event, the Council has not had opportunity to discuss the report so 
> voting on this motion during the meeting on the 9th is not practical.
> The moton is being presented here to get it on the agenda for discussion 
> purposes only. I do believe we could be able to vote on it as early as 
> Singapore.
> 
> Thanks,
> Tim
> 
> 
> 
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
> database 6172 (20110601) __________
> 
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> 
> http://www.eset.com
> 
> 
>