Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Public Comments on CSG Work Team Recommendations

[Olga Cavalli <olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Julie, I am ok with this version.
Comments are welcome.
Chuck could you please remind me which is the deadline for submitting
motions to the GNSO before our next conference call?
Best regards
Olga

2010/7/20 Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>

> Chuck and Olga,
>
> Here is the revised motion with the wording Chuck has suggested (below in
> red -- “use” instead of “evaluation”).  I also deleted the last resolved
> that dissolved the GCOT since there may be remaining work with the
> procedures.  Thanks, Julie
>
>
> WHEREAS, the GNSO Council, at its 23 June 2010 meeting in Brussels,
> accepted a set of deliverables submitted by the GNSO Council Operations
> Work Team (GCOT) <*
> https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?gnso_operations_team*>  and the 
> Constituency
> and Stakeholder Group Operations Work Team (CSG-WT) <*
> https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_operations_team*> ;
>
>
>
> WHEREAS, a twenty-one (21) day Public Comment Forum <*
> http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#gcot-csg-recommendations*>
> completed between 28 June 2010 and 18 July 2010 and a Staff Summary and
> Analysis <*
> http://forum.icann.org/lists/gcot-csg-recommendations/msg00001.html*> has
> been published;
> WHEREAS, the GNSO Council agreed to take action on the these deliverables
> as soon as possible after the end of the public comment period;
>
> WHEREAS, there were no public comments submitted that would amend any of
> the GCOT or CSG-WT recommendations;
>
> NOW, BE IT THEREFORE:
>
> RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council approves the following set of GCOT
> documents, without further modification, and directs Staff to publish a new
> version of the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) containing these sections and
> chapters:
> ·         Section 2.1-Council Member Term Limits <*
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-term-limits-24may10-en.pdf
> *>
> ·         Section 2.4-Board Seat Elections <*
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-board-seat-elections-24may10-en.pdf
> *>
> ·         Section 3.8-Absences and Vacancies <*
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-absences-vacancies-11jun10-en.pdf
> *>
> ·         Chapter 4.0-Voting <*
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-voting-11jun10-en.pdf
> *>
> ·         Chapter 5.0-Statements and Disclosures of Interest <*
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-soi-doi-11jun10-en.pdf
> *>
> o   Note that two sections, 5.3.2 and 5.3.3, are not approved pending
> further Staff action to be determined.  These sections are footnoted in the
> document as “inactive” until subsequently approved by the OSC and Council.
>
> RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council approves the following CSG-WT
> deliverable and directs Staff to provide these recommendations to GNSO
> Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies for use in amending their charters,
> as appropriate:
>
> ·         *Recommended Common Operating Principles and Participation
> Guidelines for GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies; and  <
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-csg-recommendations-task-27may10-en.pdf>
>
> Recommendations on a GNSO Database of Community Members <
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-csg-recommendations-task-27may10-en.pdf>
>
> *
> On 7/20/10 5:37 PM, "Olga Cavalli" <olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>  Hi,
> I agree with Chuck.
> Regards
> Olga
>
> 2010/7/20 Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Sorry Victoria.  This will not work because the Council has no authority
> over SGs and Constituencies.
>
> Julie – I suggested one word amendment choices that I think would work.
>
> Chuck
>
>
> *From:* owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>]
> *On Behalf Of *Victoria McEvedy
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 20, 2010 5:15 PM
> *To:* Julie Hedlund; Olga Cavalli
> *Cc:* gnso-osc-csg
> *Subject:* RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Public Comments on CSG Work Team
> Recommendations
>
>
> Julie –suggested amendment:
>
> RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council approves [the CSG-WT majority
> recommendations [and/or] the minority recommendations].   GNSO Stakeholder
> Groups and Constituencies are to implement mandatory recommendations and any
> non-mandatory recommendations as adopted by their general body on a vote by
> the full membership and shall incorporate the changes in Charters and any
> other relevant documents, if any, within two months of the date of this
> resolution. Compliance with this recommendation to be within the
> jurisdiction of and supervised by the GNSO Council:
> ·         *Recommended Common Operating Principles and Participation
> Guidelines for GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies; and  <
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-csg-recommendations-task-27may10-en.pdf>
> Recommendations on a GNSO Database of Community Members <
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-csg-recommendations-task-27may10-en.pdf>
>
> *
>
>
>
> Victoria McEvedy
> Principal
> McEvedys
> *Solicitors** and Attorneys
> *
>
> 96 Westbourne Park Road
> London
> W2 5PL
>
> T:    +44 (0) 207 243 6122
> F:    +44 (0) 207 022 1721
> M:   +44 (0) 7990 625 169
> *
> www.mcevedy.eu <http://www.mcevedy.eu>
> *
> Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority #465972
> This email and its attachments are confidential and intended for the
> exclusive use of the addressee(s).  This email and its attachments may also
> be legally privileged. If you have received this in error, please let us
> know by reply immediately and destroy the email and its attachments without
> reading, copying or forwarding the contents.
> This email does not create a solicitor-client relationship and no retainer
> is created by this email communication.
>
>
> *From:* Julie Hedlund 
> [mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx<julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>]
>
> *Sent:* 20 July 2010 16:28
> *To:* Victoria McEvedy; Olga Cavalli
> *Cc:* gnso-osc-csg
> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Public Comments on CSG Work Team
> Recommendations
>
> Dear Victoria,
>
> Please do suggest language.  Staff language was merely a suggestion.
>
> Best,
>
> Julie
>
>
> On 7/20/10 11:15 AM, "Victoria McEvedy" <victoria@xxxxxxxxxx <
> http://victoria@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
> Thank you Julie.
>
> The obvious issue with that language is that it renders every single
> recommendation entirely optional and non-voluntary—and the whole exercise
> nothing more than advisory or for reference—despite the fact that after much
> discussion particular recommendations were agreed *by the majority* as “*
> must*” recommendations and the balance ‘*should*’ recommendations.
>
> It’s currently a motion for each group to carry on as these please and a
> recommendation for the status quo.  I don’t think that’s an acceptable
> outcome after our 18 months of work.
>
> I would suggest that the recommendations should be accepted as the ‘musts’
> or ‘shoulds’ as recommended in each case.
>
> I would be happy to provide some language ---or perhaps the Staff would
> like to do that in the first instance.
>
> Best,
>
>
> Victoria McEvedy
> Principal
> McEvedys
> *Solicitors** and Attorneys
> *
>
> 96 Westbourne Park Road
> London
> W2 5PL
>
> T:    +44 (0) 207 243 6122
> F:    +44 (0) 207 022 1721
> M:   +44 (0) 7990 625 169
> *
> www.mcevedy.eu <http://www.mcevedy.eu>
> *
> Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority #465972
> This email and its attachments are confidential and intended for the
> exclusive use of the addressee(s).  This email and its attachments may also
> be legally privileged. If you have received this in error, please let us
> know by reply immediately and destroy the email and its attachments without
> reading, copying or forwarding the contents.
> This email does not create a solicitor-client relationship and no retainer
> is created by this email communication.
>
>
> *From:* Julie Hedlund 
> [mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx<julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>]
>
> *Sent:* 20 July 2010 16:03
> *To:* Victoria McEvedy; Olga Cavalli
> *Cc:* gnso-osc-csg
> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Public Comments on CSG Work Team
> Recommendations
>
> Dear Victoria,
>
> Staff included that suggested language for consideration in the motion
> since Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups may need to amend their charters
> based on the recommendations in the report.
>
> Thanks,
> Julie
>
>
> On 7/20/10 10:54 AM, "Victoria McEvedy" <victoria@xxxxxxxxxx <
> http://victoria@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
> Dear WT,
>
> Could someone explain what “for evaluation in amending their charters, as
> appropriate” means? What is the origin of this language?
>
> Thank you and regards,
>
>
> Victoria McEvedy
> Principal
> McEvedys
> *Solicitors** and Attorneys
> *
>
> 96 Westbourne Park Road
> London
> W2 5PL
>
> T:    +44 (0) 207 243 6122
> F:    +44 (0) 207 022 1721
> M:   +44 (0) 7990 625 169
> *
> www.mcevedy.eu <http://www.mcevedy.eu>
> *
> Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority #465972
> This email and its attachments are confidential and intended for the
> exclusive use of the addressee(s).  This email and its attachments may also
> be legally privileged. If you have received this in error, please let us
> know by reply immediately and destroy the email and its attachments without
> reading, copying or forwarding the contents.
> This email does not create a solicitor-client relationship and no retainer
> is created by this email communication.
>
>
> *From:* owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx <http://owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>
>  [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx <owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>] *On
> Behalf Of *Julie Hedlund
>
> *Sent:* 20 July 2010 14:54
> *To:* Olga Cavalli
> *Cc:* gnso-osc-csg
> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Public Comments on CSG Work Team
> Recommendations
>
> Dear Olga,
>
> Here is a draft motion for you to consider.  Please feel free to edit it,
> of course.  Let me know if I can help in any way.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Julie
>
> *DRAFT RESOLUTION:  Final Council Action on GCOT & CSG Deliverables
> *
> WHEREAS, the GNSO Council, at its 23 June 2010 meeting in Brussels,
> accepted a set of deliverables submitted by the GNSO Council Operations
> Work Team (GCOT) <*
> https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?gnso_operations_team*>  and the 
> Constituency
> and Stakeholder Group Operations Work Team (CSG-WT) <*
> https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_operations_team*> ;
>
> WHEREAS, a twenty-one (21) day Public Comment Forum <*
> http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#gcot-csg-recommendations*>
> completed between 28 June 2010 and 18 July 2010 and a Staff Summary and
> Analysis <*
> http://forum.icann.org/lists/gcot-csg-recommendations/msg00001.html*> has
> been published;
> WHEREAS, the GNSO Council agreed to take action on the these deliverables
> as soon as possible after the end of the public comment period;
>
> WHEREAS, there were no public comments submitted that would amend any of
> the GCOT or CSG-WT recommendations;
>
> NOW, BE IT THEREFORE:
>
> RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council approves the following set of GCOT
> documents, without further modification, and directs Staff to publish a new
> version of the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) containing these sections and
> chapters:
> ·         Section 2.1-Council Member Term Limits <*
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-term-limits-24may10-en.pdf
> *>
> ·         Section 2.4-Board Seat Elections <*
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-board-seat-elections-24may10-en.pdf
> *>
> ·         Section 3.8-Absences and Vacancies <*
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-absences-vacancies-11jun10-en.pdf
> *>
> ·         Chapter 4.0-Voting <*
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-voting-11jun10-en.pdf
> *>
> ·         Chapter 5.0-Statements and Disclosures of Interest <*
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-soi-doi-11jun10-en.pdf
> *>
> o   Note that two sections, 5.3.2 and 5.3.3, are not approved pending
> further Staff action to be determined.  These sections are footnoted in the
> document as “inactive” until subsequently approved by the OSC and Council.
>
> RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council approves the following CSG-WT
> deliverable and directs Staff to provide these recommendations to GNSO
> Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies for evaluation in amending their
> charters, as appropriate:
> ·         *Recommended Common Operating Principles and Participation
> Guidelines for GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies; and  <
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-csg-recommendations-task-27may10-en.pdf>
>
> Recommendations on a GNSO Database of Community Members <
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-csg-recommendations-task-27may10-en.pdf>
>
> *
> RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GCOT has successfully completed its assignments,
> as chartered by the Operations Steering Committee (OSC); therefore, the GNSO
> Council hereby discharges the GCOT with its gratitude and appreciation for
> the team’s dedication, commitment, and thoughtful recommendations.
>
>
>
>
> On 7/19/10 4:36 PM, "Chuck Gomes" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx <
> http://cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
> Sounds good.  Hopefully a Councilor will make the motion and another
> Councilor on the WT will second it.
>
> Chuck
>
>
> *From:* owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx <http://owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>
>  [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx <owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>] *On
> Behalf Of *Julie Hedlund
>
> *Sent:* Monday, July 19, 2010 3:27 PM
> *To:* Olga Cavalli
> *Cc:* gnso-osc-csg
> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Public Comments on CSG Work Team
> Recommendations
>
> Dear Olga,
>
> I will forward the draft motion to you as soon as it is ready.  I think we
> can get it to you by tomorrow.
>
> Best,
>
> Julie
>
>
> On 7/19/10 3:05 PM, "Olga Cavalli" <olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx <
> http://olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
> Thanks Julie, let me know once the  motion is ready so we can move it.
> Best
> Olga
>
> 2010/7/19 Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx <
> http://julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx> >
>
> Dear Work Team members,
>
> The public comment forum on the Task 1 recommendations ended yesterday.
>  There was only one comment and it was not substantive.  I have produced a
> summary and analysis that is available here: *
> http://forum.icann.org/lists/gcot-csg-recommendations/msg00001.html*.  In
> particular, the comment did not address the Work Team’s report.  It related
> to the ICANN comment process in general.
>
> The next step is for the GNSO Council to approve the report.  Staff will
> prepare a draft motion for consideration.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Julie
>
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 5295 (20100720) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 5295 (20100720) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 5295 (20100720) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 5295 (20100720) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 5295 (20100720) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 5296 (20100720) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
>