Re: [council] Enhancing ICANN Accountability | ICANN - Proposed Next Steps for the Process

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Well, I use the next sentence as a clue:

> Each House (as described in Section 3.8 of this Article) shall select
> a Vice-Chair, who will be a Vice-Chair of the whole of the GNSO
> Council, for a term the GNSO Council specifies, but not longer than
> one year.


Noitce that is is very specific about the vice-chairs being just
vice-chairs of the Council.

No assumption.  But specific reference to council.  No problem using the
word when it was applicable.


avri




On 29-May-14 13:35, john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Avri,
> 
> Yes, I saw that 

(: but neglected to quote it? )

> but assumed (my bad?) that as it is within the
> context of the Council, it means the Council.  I make the judgement
> that the word "Council" is not attached to the Chair because whoever
> wrote the draft didn't want to use the same word three times in the
> same sentence.
> 
> If there is some background that can illuminate the intention, I
> would love to see it; but until then, I have to maintain my starting
> position.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Berard
> 
> 
> --------- Original Message --------- Subject: Re: [council] Enhancing
> ICANN Accountability | ICANN - Proposed Next Steps for the Process 
> From: "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx> Date: 5/29/14 10:23 am To:
> council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I was referring to
> 
> X.3.7. The GNSO Council shall select the GNSO Chair for a term the
> GNSO Council specifies, but not longer than one year.
> 
> I.e one of the functions of the council is to elect the GNSO chair. 
> We did that.
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> On 29-May-14 13:12, john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> Avri,
>> 
>> Pardon the colloquialism at the top of my last email. As you know,
>> I have a tendency to be flip. But in this case, I find the bylaws
>> quite specific:
>> 
>> /The GNSO shall consist of:/
>> 
>> /(i) A number of Constituencies, where applicable, organized
> within the
>> Stakeholder Groups as described in Section 5 of this Article 
>> <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/bylaws-2012-02-25-en#X-5>;
>> /
>> 
>> /(ii) Four Stakeholder Groups organized within Houses as described
>> in Section 5 of this Article 
>> <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/bylaws-2012-02-25-en#X-5>;/
>> 
>> /(iii) Two Houses within the GNSO Council as described in Section
>> 3(8) of this Article
>> 
> <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/bylaws-2012-02-25-en#X-3.8>;
> and/
>> 
>> /(iv) *a GNSO Council responsible for managing the policy
>> development process of the GNSO*, as described in Section 3 of this
>> Article 
>> <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/bylaws-2012-02-25-en#X-3>./
>> 
>> 
>> The *bold face* above is mine. The GNSO Council, of course, is but
>> one element of the GNSO overall. It has a chair devoted to keeping
>> we Councillors on course, and Jonathan (and Stephane before him and
>> Chuck before him) has done the job well. That is a big job the
>> Council has, but it does not cover everything on which the GNSO can
>> have a voice.
>> 
>> See you in London!
>> 
>> Berard
>> 
>> 
>> --------- Original Message --------- Subject: Re: [council]
>> Enhancing ICANN Accountability | ICANN - Proposed Next Steps for
>> the Process From: "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx> Date: 5/29/14 9:51
>> am To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 29-May-14 11:39, john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> Now it is a party.
>> 
>> Sorry?
>> 
>> 
>>> With regard to your point, there is "far less support for, or 
>>> agreement on, a bottom-up model" from whom? The BC strongly 
>>> supports the concept, despite its difference from the more
>>> normal top-down process in most corporations.
>> 
>> As I tried to explain I think we have different views of the degree
>> of grasp the bottom-up needs for each and every utterance a
> Representative
>> makes. these give different views of what we regard as bottom-up.
>> My expectation is that the senior staff has a more representative
>> notion ass opposed to the kind of understanding you indicate the BC
>> has, for example.
>> 
>>> As for Jonathan, he is elected the chair of the GNSO Council
>>> and, perhaps, as the titular head of the GNSO in full, the
>>> increased use of him by the staff and CEO to stand as the actual
>>> head of the entire GNSO is a point of irritation for many.
>> 
>> 
>> Perhaps, but the bylaws make it clear that he is the elected head
> of the
>> GNSO.
>> 
>> I am among those who have found themselves irritated by the fact
>> that some attempt to diminish that role by trying to limit it to
>> the
> council.
>> I would be equally irritated if the chair were to reject the
> duality of
>> the role as chair of the Council and of the GNSO. I think it is a
>> good thing that we have someone we can trust to speak for the GNSO
>> when asked by the Chair of the Board or the
> President
>> of Company.
>> 
>> And since that is the way the by-laws names the role, that is who I
>> was electing, when I voted for chair. We as council members where
>> entrusted by our SGs to be representatives and given the vote to 
>> elect a chair for the Supporting organization. We did and we
> should not
>> attempt to undercut the authority he was given by our election.
>> 
>> 
>> avri
>> 
>