Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER Re: Action item from SCI Meeting 06 March -- Re-Submitting a Motion

[Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Ron.  I can confirm that re-submitting a motion is an item on our
agenda for our next meeting, which we are planning using a Doodle poll.

Best regards,

Julie

From:  Ron Andruff <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization:  RNA Partners
Date:  Tuesday, May 28, 2013 11:48 AM
To:  James Bladel <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx"
<gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc:  'Jennifer Standiford' <JStandiford@xxxxxxx>
Subject:  RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER Re: Action item from SCI
Meeting 06 March -- Re-Submitting a Motion

Thank you James and Jennifer for the quick turnaround on this matter.  As I
understand it, the request for re-submitting a motion had never happened
before the first occasion, which brought it to our table, but I agree that
it would be for the Committee to discuss the idea of frequency to make sure
we are all of like mind as to what this would mean.
 
By way of this mail, I am asking Julie to be sure to include this in our
next meeting.
 
Kind regards,
 
RA
 

Ronald N. Andruff
RNA Partners, Inc. <http://www.rnapartners.com>


From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of James M. Bladel
Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2013 9:51 PM
To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Jennifer Standiford
Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER Re: Action item from SCI
Meeting 06 March -- Re-Submitting a Motion
Importance: High
 

Hello SCI Team:

 

Last week, Jennifer and I were able to consult with the Registrar
Stakeholder Group (RrSG) on this issue.  We can report that RrSG members
strongly favor Option #2.

 

Additionally, Registrars agree with the proposed criteria listed, -except-
for item #2.4, which they note could be redundant if Items #2.1-#2.3 are
followed.  Finally, RrSG members would like to see the inclusion of some
limitations (per year or minimum time frame) on how frequently a motion may
be re-introduced.

 

We look forward to further discussions on our next call.

 

Thanks--

 

J.

From: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 15:45
To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER Re: Action item from SCI Meeting
06 March -- Re-Submitting a Motion

 

Dear SCI members,

 

This is a reminder of the action item on re-submitting a motion.  The action
item is as follows:

 

-- Re-Submitting a Motion -- SCI members: Circulate the options to their
Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies.

 

It is our understanding that we still need to hear from the Intellectual
Property Constituency and the Registrar Stakeholder Group.  All of the other
representatives on the SCI support option 2 below with all the criteria.

 

Best regards,

Julie

 

Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

 

Possible Options for Addressing the Re-Submission of a Motion:

 

1.  Leave up to discretion of the Chair

 

2.  Set one or more high-level criteria (in this order):

 

1)  Provide a reasoning to justify the resubmission of a motion. Complete no
later than the deadline for submitting a motion --  8 days prior to  the
next GNSO Council meeting.

2)  Publish the text of the re-submitted motion. Complete no later than the
deadline for submitting a motion --  8 days prior to  the next GNSO Council
meeting.

3)  Require a seconder of the motion from each house as a prerequisite for
placing the re-submission of the motion on the consent agenda.

4)  Allow a councilor to ask for the re-submission of the motion to be taken
off the consent agenda and to request a Council vote on whether to accept
the re-submission.

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature