Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER: Consensus Call: Current Practice in Relation to Motions

[Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for this Rudi and Julie. Looking forward to today’s call.

Amr

> On Apr 21, 2016, at 3:13 PM, Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Hi Julie,
> 
> I saw your message and yes let’s put it on the agenda of today’s call. 
> Perhaps the agenda could be :
> - roll call
> - request for extension of full consensus call for GNSO Operating Procedures 
> Proposed Revision Relating to Motions & Amendments
> - discussion subteam B : chair/vice-chair elections
> - aob
> 
> 
> Sorry for being late with the agenda, too many meetings going on (at this 
> moment in GSE call)
> 
> Rudi Vansnick
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> Op 21 apr. 2016, om 14:57 heeft Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx> het 
>> volgende geschreven:
>> 
>> Dear Rudi,
>> 
>> I replied to Amr just now without first seeing your message.  There is no 
>> rule of which I am aware that would prevent an extension, but the customary 
>> time period is two weeks.  I had separately suggested that perhaps we could 
>> discuss Amr’s request on our call today and if there are no objections then 
>> we could grant the extension.
>> 
>> Kind regards,
>> Julie
>> 
>> From: Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick@xxxxxxx>
>> Date: Thursday, April 21, 2016 at 6:46 AM
>> To: Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>, 
>> "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER: Consensus Call: Current 
>> Practice in Relation to Motions
>> 
>> Dear Amr,
>> 
>> I prefer asking Julie if it is appropriate to extend the deadline for the 
>> consensus till the 25th. Personally I see no objection, it just covers the 
>> weekend extra.
>> 
>> Julie, can we extend this call ?
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Rudi Vansnick
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> Op 21 apr. 2016, om 12:11 heeft Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx> het 
>>> volgende geschreven:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I know that this request is a pain, but I was hoping we could have the 
>>> deadline for this extended…, perhaps until Monday, April 25th.
>>> 
>>> If folks don’t agree to this, no hard feelings. I won’t hold it against 
>>> anyone. :)
>>> 
>>> Thanks.
>>> 
>>> Amr
>>> 
>>>> On Apr 20, 2016, at 4:27 PM, Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Dear SCI members,
>>>> 
>>>> This is a reminder — deadline is 21 April.
>>>> 
>>>> As agreed on the SCI call on 07 April, the attached document, CONSENSUS 
>>>> CALL-GNSO Operating Procedures Proposed Revision Relating to Motions & 
>>>> Amendments 07 April 2016, is being circulated for a formal Consensus Call. 
>>>>  The document is the proposed revision to the GNSO Operating Procedures to 
>>>> include the new text on submitting, seconding, and amending motions.
>>>> 
>>>> Background:
>>>> • On 05 March 2015 the SCI submitted to the GNSO Council a Review Request 
>>>> (see attached) concerning the fact that there are currently no formal 
>>>> procedures on (i) whether, how and by whom a properly submitted motion is 
>>>> to be seconded, and (ii) treatment of proposed amendments to such motions 
>>>> as either “friendly” or “unfriendly”.    The Review Request was one of two 
>>>> that the Council approved at its meeting on 16 April 2015. In the attached 
>>>> Review Request the GNSO Council asked that the SCI codify the existing 
>>>> customary practices of the GNSO Council and consider new processes to 
>>>> govern the seconding of motions and amendments to motions.
>>>> • On 09 October 2015 the SCI agreed on a documentation of the Current 
>>>> Practice Relating to Motions and sent a letter (attached) along with the 
>>>> original Review Request and the documentation to Jonathan Robinson, GNSO 
>>>> Council Chair.
>>>> • In December 2015 the SCI established a Sub Team A — Sara Bockey, Angie 
>>>> Graves, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben, and Lawrence Olawale-Roberts, and Rudi 
>>>> Vansnick — to review the current practice and the Sub Team submitted its 
>>>> recommendations to the SCI on 02 March 2016.  The SCI discussed the 
>>>> recommendations in Marrakech on 05 March and asked staff to draft 
>>>> revisions to the GNSO Operating Procedures per the recommendations.
>>>> • On 07 April the SCI discussed the draft revisions and asked staff to 
>>>> submit them to the SCI for a Consensus Call.
>>>> If there are no objections or changes received in two weeks by Thursday 21 
>>>> April, the language will be presumed to be accepted by Full Consensus.
>>>> 
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Julie
>>>> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> <CONSENSUS CALL-GNSO Operating Procedures Proposed Revision Relating to 
>>>> Motions & Amendments 07 April 2016.docx><CONSENSUS CALL-GNSO Operating 
>>>> Procedures Proposed Revision Relating to Motions & Amendments 07 April 
>>>> 2016.pdf><SCI Letter to GNSO Council Chair Concerning Current Practice in 
>>>> Relation to Motions 09 Oct 2015.pdf><SCI Review Request - Motions - 5 Mar 
>>>> 2015 v2.pdf>
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>