Re: [council] Revised Motion on Drafting Team/Empowerment

["James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

+1.  I never took the language to exclude NCAs, so if we feel the need to say 
this explicitly, then we should.

Thanks-

J.


From: <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> on 
behalf of WUKnoben 
<wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
Reply-To: WUKnoben 
<wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 at 12:07
To: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>, 
Johan Helsingius <julf@xxxxxxxx<mailto:julf@xxxxxxxx>>
Subject: Re: [council] Revised Motion on Drafting Team/Empowerment

I'm not sure why there is uncertainty.

This motion is related to the GNSO future. NCAs - as members of the council - 
are part of the GNSO. They should undoubtedly given the opportunity to take 
part in this effort - either being appointed themselves or appoint others.

Best regards

Wolf-Ulrich


From: Johan Helsingius<mailto:julf@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 11:12 AM
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [council] Revised Motion on Drafting Team/Empowerment

Heather,

> As I see it, only the houseless NCA falls into this category

Not sure - a house is, as I see it, neither a constituency or a stakeholder 
group,
as the whole concept of "houses" is, at least the way I see it, basically just a
voting construct. But, again, I could be very wrong. And anyway, my spell
checker keeps insisting "houseless" should be spelled "horseless".

> but I assume any SG or C could nominate someone of their choosing
> (not necessarily someone from within the SG/C).

I guess so, yes - but (and now we are really getting into minor details, but...)
can a NCA nominate anyone?

    Julf