ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [registrars] RE: Call for Constituency statements on Whois tf 1/2 recommendations

  • To: "'Robert F. Connelly'" <BobC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Registrars Constituency'" <registrars@xxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [registrars] RE: Call for Constituency statements on Whois tf 1/2 recommendations
  • From: "Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 11:49:05 -0600
  • Importance: Normal
  • In-reply-to: <>
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx



I have seen no one, except you, object to considering the 14-day discussion
period as completed on the 23rd as I proposed. Tom's suggested changes were
accepted and posted on the 20th. So if you want to give it four days, then I
won't call for a vote until the 24th. That's not quite in line with Rules
either and if you still object I will just back them out.


We could also invoke I.11 of the Rules of Procedure and have a 5 or 6 day
voting period. The exceptional circumstance is that our Task Force Reps need
a statement by January 31.


Regarding unfriendly amendments, you don't quite have that correct. Our
Rules of Procedures cover that in section I.10. So if the motion gets an
unfriendly amendment it will simply be included in the ballot.






-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Robert F. Connelly
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 11:10 PM
To: Registrars Constituency
Subject: RE: [registrars] RE: Call for Constituency statements on Whois tf
1/2 recommendations


At 04:42 AM 1/20/05, Tim Ruiz wrote:

The rules of procedure seem to indicate that the next step is to file
the motion with the Secretary who will publish it to the list for no
less than 14 days of discussion. However, the motion has already been
on the list for discussion for 11 days. Our Task Force members were
asked to have a statement by January 31. I suggest that we consider
these periods one and the same. On the 23rd we would call for a vote.
The ballot would be posted the same day for only a 24 hour review
period. There would be a seven day voting period that would commence on
the 24th and close on January 31, giving our Task Force members a
statement to submit on January 31.

Dear Tim:

Would that it were that easy.  Let's look at the wording more carefully,
remember, we have only now received the required five endorsements.   The
clock starts ticking now:

4)        Discussion of the motion will be held open on the Constituency
list for no less than 14 days.  The Chair will moderate the discussion on
the list or at any meeting or call, as applicable.  

5) During such time, amendments may be put forward by electronic
communication to the Secretary. The Secretary will accept and publish any
amendment formally to the Constituency list for the Constituencys
consideration only if it is endorsed by a second Member, and such
endorsement is communicated by electronic communication to the Secretary.
Such endorsement will be communicated to the Constituency list. 

6)        In no case will the time for publishing the motion to the list,
the discussion and making of amendments be less than 14 days after the
Secretary publishes the motion.

7)        During this period of consideration, the Proponent of the motion
may accept one or all of the amendments as friendly, and modify her or his
motion accordingly, except that no modifications will be made less than 4
days prior to the closing of the discussion period.  Any friendly amendments
will be withdrawn.

8)        Any member can call for a vote after the 14-day period
post-publication, as long as the ballot will not be published less than 4
days after any modification of the motion.

      9) The Chair will direct the Secretary to create and publish the
ballot.  The ballot will remain for inspection and possible amendment for 48
hours prior to the vote.

end quote:

Until now, all amendments appear to have been accepted as "friendly" and
incorporated in the motion.  However, that leaves us with two issues:

1. We need at least four days (see #7, above) from the time that the
Secretary receives the final draft.

2. If we receive a motion which the proponent determines it unfriendly, and
if said amendment receives an endorsement, under Robert's Rules of Order we
must vote on the amendment before we can vote on the main motion.

I don't believe we can ignore the four day limit shown in #7.

Respectfully submitted,
Bob Connelly

The reason I believe we only need a 24 hour review of the ballot is that
the ballot is simply a yay or nay to the motion that has already been on
the list for 14 days 

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>