RE: [bc-gnso] Inquiry: why are we voting in a 7 day voting period?

["Mike Rodenbaugh" <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

We did circulate another revision after the Seoul meeting, and then
incorporated further comments.  Your option now is to vote for or against
the Charter as proposed.  If the vote fails, then discussion will be
reopened for some indefinite period of time until the Officers call for
another vote on another version.

The fact that a few members are traveling this week is not significant, the
Charter has been under discussion for many many months, with the holiday
season coming up, there will be no more convenient time for this vote.

Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
548 Market Street
San Francisco, CA  94104
(415) 738-8087
http://rodenbaugh.com 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Ron Andruff
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 7:20 AM
To: 'bc - GNSO list'
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] Inquiry: why are we voting in a 7 day voting period?


With respect to Liz and Philip, I, like Mikey, understood that we would see
v20 when we finished our meeting in Seoul and vote once that was agreed
upon.  

But that is not the real issue.  The issue is why are we trying to push
through a vote when we agree that we have some minor amendments to finish?
Why don't we get that work done; then vote?

If I am missing something, please advise.

Kind regards,

RA

Ronald N. Andruff
RNA Partners, Inc.
220 Fifth Avenue, 20th floor
New York, New York 10001
 
www.rnapartners.com 
V: +1 212 481 2820 x 11
F:  +1 212 481 2859 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Liz Williams
Sent: 2009-11-12 09:03
To: Mike O'Connor
Cc: Philip Sheppard; bc - GNSO list
Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] Inquiry: why are we voting in a 7 day voting period?


Hello everyone

Could I make a suggestion that may take us forward?

The Charter has indeed been through many iterations.  I support the  
move to a vote now and then hold our elections and then, for the new  
willing victims, they take only the very few sections that may need  
amending and do that as their first piece of work once they are in  
place.  For example, we would ONLY look at section 1.x or 3.y that may  
need amending in the early new year.

I suspect that the amendments are small and that we ought not get  
stuck at the last hurdle.

Liz
On 12 Nov 2009, at 13:20, Mike O'Connor wrote:

>
> hm.  my recollection was that we were going to go through one more  
> round of revisions after Seoul to arrive at V20, and *then* vote.   
> but the meeting minutes are a little vague on this and allow the  
> interpretation that the officers would *draft* version 20 and put it  
> out for a vote.
>
> looks like we have a couple of possible outcomes;
>
> - do one more rigorous review/redraft of the charter, and then put  
> it to a vote (my recollection of the sense of the meeting)
>
> - vote this one up, get new officers installed, and fix the charter  
> after they're in place
>
> either outcome is fine with me.
>
> mikey
>
>
> On Nov 12, 2009, at 1:19 AM, philip.sheppard@xxxxxx wrote:
>
>>
>> To my knowledge the last 10 years practise has been for a 7 day vote
>> period for all BC votes. Policy paper discussions have been 14 days.
>>
>> This vote follows more than 7 months of charter discussion and 19  
>> drafts.
>> The Seoul meeting outcome was to proceed directly to a final  
>> version and a
>> vote. So members please do vote.
>>
>> Philip
>>
>>
>>
>
> - - - - - - - - -
> phone         651-647-6109
> fax           866-280-2356
> web   www.haven2.com
> handle        OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook,  
> Google, etc.)
>