RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI meeting agenda

["Ron Andruff" <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I support your recommended way forward, Wolf-Ulrich.

 

Thanks,

 

RA

 

Ronald N. Andruff

President

 

RNA Partners, Inc.

220 Fifth Avenue

New York, New York 10001

+ 1 212 481 2820 ext. 11

 

  _____  

From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 12:18 PM
To: marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx; avri@xxxxxxx
Cc: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: AW: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI meeting agenda

 

Personally my first reaction would be: we should handle it practically and
with flexibility. Don't start amending the rules unless it is imperative.

Flexibility could mean that the SCI

- for a certain period of time (eg 1 year) monitors how many issues are
raised by individuals/groups not covered by the charter. In case it exceeds
a certain volume of requests (depending on the workload) the SCI may
strictly return to the rules as written and not accept further requests from
outside

- for the a.m. period of time the SCI may discuss all issues raised and make
recommendations/suggestions re the issues in scope

- re Evan's SOI related issue I recall - if I'm right - that he was
questioning the sense of some of the points asked for in the SOI. I think we
should first find out whether his issue was more ALAC specific than relevant
to the GNSO

 

What do others mean?

 

Best regards 
Wolf-Ulrich 

 

 


  _____  


Von: Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx] 
Gesendet: Montag, 18. Juni 2012 14:47
An: Avri Doria; Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich
Betreff: FW: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI meeting agenda

Hi Wolf, Avri,

 

Under AOB, you might also want to cover the update to the GNSO Council which
is scheduled for Prague. In addition to getting clarification on who should
be responsible for putting out SCI recommendations for public comments (also
of relevance in relation to the item on consensus items), there is also this
issue with regard to who may raise issues with the SCI. As you may recall,
Evan Leibovitch raised a suggestion with regard to the SOI. There may be
other questions / suggestions that individuals may make in the future
relating to GNSO Improvements topics. However, the SCI charter says
'requests can be made by either the GNSO Council or a group chartered by the
GNSO Council'. Should individual requests be directed to the GNSO Council
for referral, or should there be another mechanism? It might be good to get
clarification on this as well so it can be made clear to those that have
proposals / questions.

 

With best regards,

 

Marika

 

From: "KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx" <KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI meeting agenda

 

All:

 

this is the suggested agenda for the SCI call on Monday June 18, 13:00 UTC:

 

- Roll call

- Statement of Interests

- Approval of the agenda

- Background information (and suggested solutions) on

        - Deferral of Motions

        - Proxy Voting Procedure

        - Voting Thresholds for Delaying a PDP

- Consensus items: GNSO Council Voting Results Table, Consent Agenda

- AOB: next meeting, F2F in Prague?

 

 

Best regards

Wolf-Ulrich