<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [gnso-osc-ops] ACTIONS: OSC GNSO Council Operations WT 09 Sept2009 Meeting
- To: "Julie Hedlund" <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>, owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx, "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx>, "gnso-osc-ops" <gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-ops] ACTIONS: OSC GNSO Council Operations WT 09 Sept2009 Meeting
- From: "Ron Andruff" <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 22:07:16 +0000
I'm good to go with this final draft.
Thanks to Julie and those making the final push,
RA
________________________________________
Ron Andruff
RNA Partners, Inc.
randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.rnapartners.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 12:22:34
To: Avri Doria<avri@xxxxxxx>; gnso-osc-ops<gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-ops] ACTIONS: OSC GNSO Council Operations WT 09 Sept
2009 Meeting
All,
Here is a revised version incorporating changes from Wolf-Ulrich, Ron, and
Avri. Note that the changes are redlined. I will be happy to make any
additional edits you may identify.
Thank you,
Julie
On 9/11/09 3:03 PM, "Julie Hedlund" <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Avri,
Thanks so much. These are very helpful changes. I will make them along with
the item clarified by Wolf-Ulrich and send around a new draft.
Best regards,
Julie
On 9/11/09 2:32 PM, "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx> wrote:
hi,
On 11 Sep 2009, at 13:50, Julie Hedlund wrote:
> <GNSO Council Operating Procedures Rev090911 edits.doc>
sorry to be late to the party, a few comments to consider:
3.1.2 needs a footnote indicating that work is ongoing on these in the
various Committee and Work teams
---
> iii. In the second ballot, in case neither
> candidate reaches the 60 percent of both houses threshold, a third
> ballot will be held between the leader and "none of the above."
might be better to say:
In case neither candidate reaches the 60 percent ...hold, a second
ballot will be held between the leader ...
---
> Except where determined by a majority vote of members of both houses
> of the GNSO Council present that a closed session is appropriate,
> meetings shall be open to physical or electronic attendance by all
> interested persons.
there had been discussion (i think) of the addition of a line such as:
The reason for such as closed session as well as the result of the
vote will be published in the minutes.
and a line i would recommend adding between the two.
Such a vote shall be taken by polling of the members.
i.e. not a voice vote or a consensus based on no objection.
----
> 5. 3 Who May Cast Votes
>
> All actions of, or votes by, the GNSO Council are taken or cast only
> by the members of the GNSO Council. Persons who are not Council
> members may not vote. Acts by the GNSO Council members present at
> any meeting at which there is a quorum shall be acts of the GNSO
> Council, unless otherwise provided herein. (See Section 5(4) of this
> Article concerning the number of votes that GNSO Council members may
> cast.)
should have caught this before
Might want to make it
Who may make motions or cast votes
All motions, actions, or votes by ....
----
> Abstentions count as votes cast
In keeping with current practice, do you want to change to:
Abstentions count as votes cast and shall include a reason for the
abstention.
----
> Within 5 working days of a GNSO Council meeting,
I thought at the last meeting, we had extended this to 8 days.
----
> Such observers shall not be members of or entitled to vote on the
> GNSO Council,
Such observers shall not be members of or entitled to vote or make
motions on the GNSO Council,
that is all i caught on this quick reading.
again apologies for being so last minute.,
a.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|