<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[bc-gnso] Returning to neutral corners
- To: icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [bc-gnso] Returning to neutral corners
- From: <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 12:08:40 -0700
<html><body><span style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000;
font-size:10pt;"><div>Mike, Ron:</div><div><br></div><div>Is it necessary to
devolve the discussion of the charter to a "did not, did too" shouting
match? </div><div><br></div><div>I suspect that some of Ron's view is
driven by the without-notice absence of Mike at some of the meetings in
Brussels and his uneven consultation. I recall that many were anxious as
they should have been. </div><div><br></div><div>Likewise, I presume Mike
is guarding the organizational lines that order the roles of the
constituencies, council and board. Worthy but a misdirection.
Constituency officers and councilors are elected in the same way by the same
people who likely expect cooperation.</div><div><br></div><div>As to my earlier
email, I would like the constituency to focus on a manageable set of
priorities, focused on eliminating barriers and promoting business opportunity
for all -- sort of a rising tide lifts all boats
metaphor.</div><div><br></div><div>Bottom line, carping ain't carpe
diem.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers (from a scorching San
Francisco!),</div><div><br></div><div>John Berard<br></div>
<blockquote id="replyBlockquote" webmail="1" style="border-left: 2px solid
blue; margin-left: 8px; padding-left: 8px; font-size: 10pt; color: black;
font-family: verdana;">
<div id="wmQuoteWrapper">
-------- Original Message --------<br>
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] CSG charter and knock-on effects to BC charter<br>
From: "Mike Rodenbaugh" <<a
href="mailto:icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx</a>><br>
Date: Tue, September 28, 2010 10:24 am<br>
To: "'Ron Andruff'" <<a
href="mailto:randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</a>>,
"'bc - GNSO<br>
list'" <<a href="mailto:bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx";>bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
Ron,<br>
<br>
Procedural rules of Council need not be enshrined in our Charter. The<br>
abstention process has already been discussed by ExComm and is in place in<br>
the event Zahid or I have advance notice of an absence or abstention.<br>
<br>
I do not believe that Zahid or I have any 'misconception' about Councilor's<br>
roles, as they are clearly defined in the Charter. Any 'misconception' may<br>
instead center around other roles, particularly the administrative Chair,<br>
which rightly has no special role in policy development under our Charter.<br>
In other words, the Chair cannot instruct the Councilors how to vote, nor<br>
can the ExComm, and this is how it should be. Otherwise a small minority of<br>
members, elected for roles that have little to do with policy development,<br>
would have undue influence over the elected policy Councilors. It is up to<br>
the Councilors to vote in accord with the wishes of the Constituency, as<br>
judged from the Constituency's written policy positions and otherwise within<br>
the elected Councilors' discretion.<br>
<br>
If you are proposing to change that fundamental structure, then it is a very<br>
large change that requires debate. So, what are you proposing?<br>
<br>
Mike Rodenbaugh<br>
RODENBAUGH LAW<br>
tel/fax: +1 (415) 738-8087<br>
<a href="http://rodenbaugh.com";>http://rodenbaugh.com</a><br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: <a href="mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx";>owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx</a> [<a
href="mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx";>mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx</a>] On
Behalf Of<br>
Ron Andruff<br>
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:39 AM<br>
To: 'bc - GNSO list'<br>
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] CSG charter and knock-on effects to BC charter<br>
<br>
<br>
Mike, Philip and all,<br>
<br>
As part of the GNSO Council Operating Procedures Work Team, I note that one<br>
refinement to our Charter (under the new requirements) is that the revised<br>
charters need to require constituency reps to advise their constituencies<br>
when they will be absent or abstaining from a vote as all votes belong to<br>
the constituencies not the councilors. This new procedure is required<br>
because of the low voting thresholds within the new 'house' structure.<br>
<br>
This amendment not only clarifies any misconception that the BC's councilors<br>
can vote their personal wishes over those of the constituency, but<br>
additionally provides a clearly defined mechanism to alert the ExComm when<br>
councilors intend to abstain or be absent whenever votes are taken.<br>
<br>
Separately, Sarah, I would also like to join you, Philip and others on the<br>
drafting team working group.<br>
<br>
Thank you.<br>
<br>
Kind regards,<br>
<br>
RA<br>
<br>
Ronald N. Andruff<br>
President<br>
RNA Partners, Inc.<br>
220 Fifth Avenue<br>
New York, New York 10001<br>
<br>
+ 1 212 481 2820 ext. 11<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: <a href="mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx";>owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx</a> [<a
href="mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx";>mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx</a>] On
Behalf Of<br>
Philip Sheppard<br>
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:32 AM<br>
To: 'bc - GNSO list'<br>
Subject: [bc-gnso] CSG charter and knock-on effects to BC charter<br>
<br>
<br>
Sarah, <br>
thank you for your reply.<br>
I wasn't aware I was making any accusations just a request.<br>
<br>
You reminded us of your Brussels presentation:<br>
"Welcome small working group to help to offer suggestions on language<br>
options<br>
and comments on draft text".<br>
<br>
I volunteer for this small working group.<br>
<br>
Who else is on it?<br>
May I see the draft text?<br>
<br>
Philip<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote></span></body></html>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|