ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-improvem-impl-sc]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] New task

  • To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] New task
  • From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 06:16:26 -0500


On 23 Dec 2012, at 05:49, Jonathan Robinson wrote:

>  
> The question should simply be "should there be any restrictions on 
> resubmitting motions that previously appeared before the Council?  If so, 
> what should those restrictions be and are there any exceptions?
>  


I think that the answer is yes there must be restrictions. I suggest the 
following 3

1. there should be an interval of several months
2. there should have been a substantive change to the motion
3. there should be a change in the countervailing conditions.

Reasons that are not acceptable:

-  I did not understand how I should vote
-  I now see the error of my vote

Otherwise, there is no reason to not bring up a losing motion each and every 
meeting.

And things that should never be accepted is a chair explaining the way to vote 
after a vote has already been cast.  It is very difficult to not see that as 
vote manipulation.

There should be not exceptions, and the Chair should not have discretion in 
this matter.  The impression of a chair losing his or her neutrality by 
appearing to manipulate a vote is a very bad thing for the g-council.

avri



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy