[gnso-improvem-impl-sc] AW: AW: For final review - consent agenda

[<KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I like that. Thanks.



Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich



________________________________
Von: Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 12. Juni 2012 14:40
An: Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich; gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
Betreff: Re: AW: For final review - consent agenda

In relation to question 1, the reason for referring to the ICANN Bylaws is that 
these are the governing rules. The GNSO Council voting result table is derived 
from the ICANN Bylaws. It is, therefore, recommended to refer to the 
authoritative document, which are the ICANN Bylaws. With regard to question 2, 
I see what you mean. I've made a couple of small edits which might address your 
concern as it now specifically refers to items that are excluded from the 
consent agenda instead of the previous wording which seemed to imply that only 
items that are subject to a simple majority vote are eligible for inclusion in 
the consent agenda. Further comments / edits welcome!

With best regards,

Marika

P.S. To facilitate review, I've accepted all the changes from the previous 
version.

From: "KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>" 
<KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>>
To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>>, 
"gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>" 
<gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: AW: For final review - consent agenda

Thanks Marika,

Second phrase in the draft says: "All items that are not subject to a simple 
majority vote (see ICANN Bylaws, Article X, section 3-9) or are subject to 
absentee voting (see section 4.4. of the GNSO Operating Procedures) are not 
eligible for inclusion in the consent agenda."
Two questions: 1. Why don't we refer to the GNSO concil votings results table 
(which make reference to the bylaws, too)? 2. Excluding items from the consent 
agenda I understand we're here referring to items only which need a council 
vote. In other words: it should be clear that items not needing a council vote 
are not excluded.



Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich



________________________________
Von: 
owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>
 [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Marika Konings
Gesendet: Montag, 4. Juni 2012 15:59
An: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>
Betreff: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] For final review - consent agenda

Dear All,

As discussed during the SCI meeting last week, please find attached for final 
review the latest version of the proposed language for the consent agenda.

As a reminder, this issue was discussed extensively at the SCI meeting of 3 May 
(see notes of the meeting here: https://community.icann.org/x/JMTbAQ) and the 
language as originally proposed by J. Scott was updated accordingly (see 
http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-improvem-impl-sc/msg00172.html).

The SCI intends to finalize this language at its next meeting, so if you have 
any objections and/or suggestions, please share those with the mailing list as 
soon as possible.

With best regards,

Marika