Re: [gnso-consensus-wg] GNSO Consensus Current Thinking

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

hi Jon,

thanks for doing this.  it does seem to match what i think i heard.

one clarification

On 22 Jul 2008, at 21:32, Nevett, Jonathon wrote:

> One GNSO Council Chair appointed by Nominating Committee
To be clear I think it should say ...appointed by Nominating Committee  
as chair.
Otherwise it might be understood as the council  electing the chair  
from the group of 3.
Also, I assume this is a non voting chair except perhaps if we go for  
option 4 in director elections.
>    iv.      Entire GNSO Council votes on both seats with weighted  
> voting to maintain parity between contracted and non-contracted  
> parties.  Criteria for Seats 13 and 14 would be that both may not be  
> held by individuals who are employed by, an agent of, or receive any  
> compensation from an ICANN-accredited registry or registrar, nor may  
> they both be held by individuals who are members of or directly  
> involved in one of the GNSO user stakeholder groups.
and one issue:

I still think it is better if the directors are elected by the entire  
council.  not necessarily option 4 but  one of the variants of the 2  
house vote like:
>     iii.      simple majority of both houses, but requires that at  
> least one representative of at least 3 of the 4 stakeholder groups  
> supports

with the conditions set so that the interests of one house  
predominates for 13 and the other for 14.  this can be done by  
restricting the nominations to one house or the other.

a.