<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
AW: [gnso-osc-ops] ICANN Staff Document on Abstentions
- To: <kstubbs@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <ray@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: AW: [gnso-osc-ops] ICANN Staff Document on Abstentions
- From: <KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:56:17 +0100
I also support this.
Wolf-Ulrich
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] Im
Auftrag von Ken Stubbs
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 11. November 2009 20:22
An: Ray Fassett
Cc: 'Ron Andruff'; 'Avri Doria'; 'gnso-osc-ops'
Betreff: Re: [gnso-osc-ops] ICANN Staff Document on Abstentions
Makes sense for me to !
Ray Fassett wrote:
> Makes sense to me too.
>
> Ray
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Ron Andruff
> Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 2:01 PM
> To: 'Avri Doria'; 'gnso-osc-ops'
> Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-ops] ICANN Staff Document on Abstentions
>
>
> Good point, Avri. I support your thesis on 'voluntary' if there has been
> any engagement.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> RA
>
> Ronald N. Andruff
> RNA Partners, Inc.
> 220 Fifth Avenue, 20th floor
> New York, New York 10001
>
> www.rnapartners.com
> V: +1 212 481 2820 x 11
> F: +1 212 481 2859
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: 2009-11-11 13:30
> To: gnso-osc-ops
> Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-ops] ICANN Staff Document on Abstentions
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Just to add a thought.
>
> While I am rather resistant to the idea of decreasing the denominator
> for an abstention, I can see the possibility of extreme cases that
> might warrant it. I like the stringent rules defined by Ken including
> the requirement for approval by the opposite house in those case where
> the SG group is not willing to require the vote. I would, however,
> like to suggest an additional caveat - if the person asking to make
> an abstention has ever uttered a single word, beyond the expression of
> their conflict of interest, during the discussions on that topic in
> either the council or any of its WGs then that abstention must be
> deemed voluntary.
>
> a.
>
>
>
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|