RE: [gnso-consensus-wg] Process for Closing Off Substantive Deliberations

[<tony.ar.holmes@xxxxxx>]

This is fine by me, the only major issue appear to be the point Avri
made where it seems there is a misunderstanding (?) otherwise the issues
are mainly non contentious (I hope) and editorial.
 
Tony

________________________________

From: owner-gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Robert Hoggarth
Sent: 25 July 2008 16:35
To: Jonathon Nevett; gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-consensus-wg] Process for Closing Off Substantive
Deliberations 
Importance: High


All:

Many thanks to Jon for tracking the discussions and regularly updating
the snapshot. 

In order for us to stay on schedule to submit the final group report on
time and to be respectful of the announced schedule that folks in many
different time zones agreed to we'll need to cut-off deliberations VERY
shortly.  Because a couple of folks have had mail server delivery issues
today I think it would be useful to give you all an opportunity for some
final observations to address the last few comments made by Alan, Avri,
Steve, Chuck and Tony, particularly since a couple comments suggest some
final significant items of clarification. 

The agreement on the call yesterday was that we would submit the final
snapshot with very little packaging other than a broad overview of the
process and areas of general agreement.  If there remain any significant
areas of disagreement on an issue they should not be included in the
snapshot. 

Let's give it to 900 PDT and individual group members can record any
final substantive concerns in their separate statements to be included
with the Board submission.  I'll allow a couple of extra minutes for
mail server delivery issues and will send out the "discussion closed"
announcement.  Hope that doesn't sound too draconian - I just think its
important to have a clear finish line.

Jon (if you're still on-line), will it be possible at that time to send
out a final snapshot version in word format reflecting any final
clarifications? I never did see yellow or gray text in messages I
received.

Thanks,

 RobH




On 7/25/08 8:02 AM, "Jonathon Nevett" <jnevett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:



        Ok - I made the line edits that Chuck suggested; changed 75% for
out of scope PDPs; added Board approval for removal of NomCom
appointees; and deleted the yellow (ok - I couldn't figure out how to
delete the yellow, so I overwrote it with light grey!).   If someone
could help with that, I would appreciate it.
         
        Please read through it carefully, the only objection that has
been raised so far is the BC objection to the Council Chair selection
process.  In the spirit of compromise, I hope that the BC will withdraw
it.  I'm sure that no one is happy with every provision. 
         
        Thanks. 
         
        Jon
        
         
        GNSO Restructure Proposal - for discussion purposes only
        
        

        1.      One GNSO Council with two voting "houses" - referred to
as bicameral voting - GNSO Council will meet as one, but houses may
caucus on their own as they see fit.  Unless otherwise stated, all
voting of the Council will be counted at a house level. 
                

        
        

        1.      Composition 
                

        
        

                1.      GNSO Council would be comprised of two voting
houses 
                        

                                                                    i.
Contracted Party House - an equal number of registry and registrar
representatives and 1 Nominating Committee appointee.  The number of
registry and registrar stakeholder representatives will be determined by
the ICANN Board based on input from these stakeholder groups, but shall
be no fewer than 3 and not exceed 4 representatives for each group.  
                                                                  ii.
User/Non-Contracted Party House - an equal number of commercial and
non-commercial user representatives and 1 Nominating Committee
appointee.  The number of commercial and non-commercial stakeholder
representatives will be determined by the ICANN Board based on input
from these stakeholder groups, but shall be no fewer than 5 and not
exceed 9 representatives for each group.  
                                                                iii.
1 Council-level Nominating Committee Appointee
         
        

        1.      Leadership 
                

                1.      One GNSO Council Chair - elected by 60% of both
houses.  If no one is elected Chair, the Council-level Nominating
Committee Appointee shall serve as a non-voting Chair of Council 
                2.      Two GNSO Vice Chairs - one elected from each of
the voting houses.  If the Council Chair is elected from one of the
houses, however, then the Council-level Nominating Committee Appointee
shall serve as one of the Vice Chairs in lieu of the Vice Chair from the
house of the elected Chair.  If the Chair is elected from one of the
houses, that person shall retain his/her vote on that house. 
                        

        
        

        1.      Voting Thresholds 
                

                1.      Create an Issues Report - either greater than
25% vote of both houses or simple majority of one house (currently 25%
of vote of Council) 
                2.      Initiate a PDP within Scope of the GNSO per
ICANN Bylaws and advice of ICANN GC (currently >33% of vote of Council)
-- greater than 33% vote of both houses or greater than 66% vote of one
house 
                3.      Initiate a PDP not within Scope of the GNSO per
ICANN Bylaws and advice of ICANN GC - greater than 75% vote of one house
and a simple majority of the other (currently >66% of vote of Council) 
                4.      Appoint a Task Force (currently >50% of vote of
Council) -- greater than 33% vote of both houses or greater than 66%
vote of one house 
                5.      Approval of a PDP without Super-Majority
(currently >50% of vote of Council) -- Simple majority of both houses,
but requires that at least one representative of at least 3 of the 4
stakeholder groups supports 
                6.      Super-Majority Approval of a PDP (currently >66%
of vote of Council) - Greater than 75% majority in one house and simple
majority in the other 
                7.      Removal of NomCom Appointees for Cause subject
to ICANN Board approval (currently 75% of Council) 
                        

                                                                    i.
At least 75% of User/NCP House House to remove Nominating Committee
appointee on User/NCP House
                                                                  ii.
At least 75% of Contracted Parties House and simple majority of User/NCP
House to remove Nominating Committee appointee on Contracted Parties
House
                                                                iii.
At least 75% of both voting houses to remove the Council-level
Nominating Committee Appointee
        

                1.      All other GNSO Business - simple majority of
both voting houses 
                        

        
        

        1.      Board Elections 
                

                1.      Election of Board Seats 13 & 14 at the end of
the current terms (currently simple majority vote of Council) 
                        

        Board Elections -- Contracted Parties House elects Seat 13 by a
60% vote and User/Non-Contracted Party House elects Seat 14 by a 60%
vote; BUT both seats 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
the appointed representatives to one of the GNSO user stakeholder
groups.
         
        

        1.      Representation 
                

                1.      All four stakeholder groups must strive to
fulfill pre-established objective criteria regarding broadening outreach
and deepening participation from a diverse range of participants. 
                2.      All stakeholder groups must have rules and
processes in place that make it possible for any and all people and
organizations eligible for the stakeholder group to join, participate
and be heard regardless of their policy viewpoints.