Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Proposal for Deferral of Motions

[Angie Graves <angie@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

My vote (but only as Alternate SCI member for the BC) is Option 1.

Thank you,

Angie

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Ron Andruff <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> ** ** ** ** ** ** **
>
> SCI colleagues,****
>
> ** **
>
> This email is in response to the Chairman’s request that I prepare a
> proposal for us to ‘vote’ on to resolve the discussion around deferral of
> motions. Many thanks to Julie Hedlund for her work in preparing this for
> your review.****
>
> ** **
>
> As we discussed during our most recent meeting this past Thursday, Aug. 9
> th, we seem to be coalescing around couple of ways to address the issue
> of deferral of motions.  As you may recall, the issue was whether to create
> a rule in the GNSO Council Operating Procedures to limit how many times a
> motion may be deferred.  Staff provided statistics from 2010 and 2011 on
> the number of deferrals.  The SCI members seem to agree that the numbers
> were not high and did not suggest abuse.  Conversations on the wiki (see
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/Deferral+of+Motions) suggest
> two ways the SCI could recommend that the GNSO Council could address this
> issue:****
>
> ** **
>
> 1.  A light touch approach, i.e. request Staff to monitor deferred motions
> for one year and present the results to the SCI.  At that time, the SCI
> will once again analyze the results, decide whether deferrals are being
> abused, and whether a change to the Procedures is warranted; or ****
>
> ** **
>
> 2.  Recommend to the GNSO Council a change to the Procedures that sets a
> limit on the number of deferrals.  The limit would be 1 deferral and the
> issue that was deferred would be the first item on the following GNSO
> Council agenda.****
>
> ** **
>
> We would now like to see if we can reach a consensus on one or the other
> of these two recommendations to the GNSO Council on Deferral of Motions.
>  Please indicate on the list your preference for one of these two options
> (if not in agreement, suggest a third option for SCI members to consider).
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> Thank you for your assistance in helping us move item this to completion.*
> ***
>
> ** **
>
> Kind regards,****
>
> ** **
>
> RA****
>
> ** **
>
> Ronald N. Andruff****
>
> RNA Partners, Inc.****
>
> ************************** **
>
>  ****
>   ------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Nathalie Peregrine
> *Sent:* Friday, August 10, 2012 2:24 AM
> *To:* gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
> *Cc:* gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Mp3 and attendance: Standing Committee
> on Improvements Implementation 09 August 2012****
>
> ** **
>
> Dear All,****
>
> ** **
>
> *The next Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation meeting will
> take place in three weeks’ time, on the 30th August 2012.*
>
> ** **
>
> Please find the Mp3 recording from the SCI call on *Thursday, 09 August
> 2012* at:  http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-sci-20120809-en.mp3 on page **
> **
>
> ** **
>
> Transcript and Mp3 recorded will be posted shortly on:****
>
> http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#aug****
>
> ** **
>
> *Attendees *****
>
>  ****
>
> Ray Fassett - Registry Stakeholder Group  - Primary****
>
> Angie Graves - Commercial and Business Users Constituency - Alternate****
>
> **J. Scott Evans** - Intellectual Property Constituency – Primary ****
>
> Anne Aikman-Scalese – IPC Alternate****
>
> Ron Andruff - Commercial and Business Users Constituency - Primary****
>
> Wolf-Ulrich Knoben – ISPCP – Primary ****
>
> James Bladel - Registrar Stakeholder Group (RrSG) - Alternate****
>
> ** **
>
> *Apology:*
>
> * *
>
> Avri Doria – Non Commercial SG – Primary ****
>
> Mary Wong – Non-Commercial Users Constituency - Primary****
>
> Jonathan Robinson – Registry Stakeholder Group  - Alternate****
>
> Krista Papac - Registrar Stakeholder Group (RrSG) - Primary****
>
> Marika Konings****
>
> * *
>
> *Staff:*
>
> Julie Hedlund****
>
> Nathalie Peregrine****
>
> ** **
>
> Please let me know if your name has been left off the list.****
>
> Let me know if you have any questions.****
>
> ** **
>
> Thank you.****
>
> Kind regards,****
>
> Nathalie Peregrine for****
>
> ** **
>
> GNSO Secretariat****
>
> gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx****
>
> ** **
>
> *AC Chat transcript 09 August 2012*
>
> ** **
>
>   Nathalie  Peregrine:SCI meeting - 09 August 2012****
>
>   Julie Hedlund:Hello Nathalie!****
>
>   Ron A:Greetings all!****
>
>   Ron A:Thanks for this, Ray... Amusing that a member of our work team got
> called on that... ;o)****
>
>   Ray Fassett:oops :)****
>
>   Ron A:Apologies for the background noise, unfortunately I cannot escape
> the fact there is another caller close by at this time.****
>
>   Ron A:+1 Julie; no motion needed****
>
>   Ron A:15 - love****
>
>   Ron A:@ Angie: Indeed. This language opens the door...****
>
>   Ron A:@ Julie: that makes sense to me****
>
>   Ron A:Let's take this back to Council****
>
>   Ray Fassett:thanks Wolf****
>
>   Ron A:Thanks all!****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>