RE: [gnso-osc-ops] Abstentions and Conflicts of Interest]

["Ray Fassett" <ray@xxxxxxxxx>]

Ron has offered to chair our teleconference scheduled for tomorrow but also
with the question of our agenda items...good question.

First, since neither Wolf nor I are able to attend, can we get a count (by
response to this e-mail) of those planning to attend the call tomorrow, yea
or nay?

As far as agenda, I think we've taken the RoP as far as we can pending some
legal advice from ICANN staff (reasons stated previous).  Do others agree,
including those involved from staff support?

I think we may be at a point of taking a step back and looking to prioritize
our work again.  I am open to suggestions/thoughts here.

Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 3:03 AM
To: ray@xxxxxxxxx; randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ken.bour@xxxxxxxxxxx;
gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx; robert.hoggarth@xxxxxxxxx;
liz.gasster@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: AW: [gnso-osc-ops] Abstentions and Conflicts of Interest]

Ray, I've also a time conflict (of interests?) since I decided to attend a
New gTLD conference tomorrow in Berlin with ICANN (Rod Beckstrom)
participation. Sorry!
Would it be possible to quickly find a new date (via Doodle) convenient for
all of us?

Thanks for your understanding
Wolf-Ulrich



-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] Im
Auftrag von Ray Fassett
Gesendet: Montag, 7. Dezember 2009 19:20
An: 'Ron Andruff'; 'Ken Bour'; gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx; robert.hoggarth@xxxxxxxxx;
liz.gasster@xxxxxxxxx
Betreff: RE: [gnso-osc-ops] Abstentions and Conflicts of Interest]


Thanks Ron.

By the way, I am looking for a stand-in to Chair the meeting this Wednesday.
I have an unavoidable, all day conflict.  Any takers?

-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Andruff [mailto:randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 1:17 PM
To: 'Ray Fassett'; 'Ken Bour'; gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx; robert.hoggarth@xxxxxxxxx;
liz.gasster@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-ops] Abstentions and Conflicts of Interest]

I agree with you, Ray.  This question is above my pay-grade, so let's look
to staff for the answer.

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 Ray Fassett
Sent: 2009-12-07 13:03
To: 'Ken Bour'; gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx; robert.hoggarth@xxxxxxxxx;
liz.gasster@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-ops] Abstentions and Conflicts of Interest]


It appears to me we need ICANN Counsel advice on the concept of
"transferring a vote" from one individual to another individual.  I've been
trying to reason out the issue from the perspective that "the Constituencies
and/or SGs do, indeed, own/control their votes" on the thinking that this
places accountability where it best belongs being at the SG/Constituency
level (vs. at the Council level).  I wonder if we should seek ICANN Counsel
advice on this question too?  i.e. Does the SG/Constituency own/control
their own vote and does this have any significance to the concept of being
able to transfer a vote from individual to another individual when various
scripted conditions are met?  Thoughts?


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Ken Bour
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 10:09 AM
To: 'Ray Fassett'; gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx; robert.hoggarth@xxxxxxxxx;
liz.gasster@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-osc-ops] Abstentions and Conflicts of Interest]


Hi Ray:

Please see my comments below to your questions.

Ken

-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Fassett [mailto:ray@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 9:08 AM
To: gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx; ken.bour@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx; robert.hoggarth@xxxxxxxxx;
liz.gasster@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [Fwd: [gnso-osc-ops] Abstentions and Conflicts of Interest]

Ken, sorry for the delay...and thank you for preparing this document for us.

I have 3 questions:

1.  In the case of an MCOI (Material Conflict of Interest), the primary
remedy is to seek transferring the vote to its NCA.  Is this correct?

[KAB] The primary and easiest remedy is shown in 5.2(a), that is, direct how
the vote should be entered.  If that will not eliminate the problem (e.g.
the attorney case), then transferring the vote is the next best option
(5.2(b)) versus losing it entirely.  Whether the vote should be vested with
the voting House NCA or another Councilor is subject to further discussion;
but, that is the way it is currently drafted.  

2.  The option for a Stakeholder Group (or Constituency) to transfer the
vote of the conflicted rep to another rep of the same SG or Constituency is
not provided as a possible remedy...is this correct?

[KAB] Actually, it is provided as an option if the House NCA is
"unavailable."  Currently, I have that clause in parentheses, but it could
be pulled out and made explicit.

3.  In the example, it assumes the Contracted Party House chose not to have
its NCA vote on behalf of the conflicted rep, is this correct?

[KAB] True. The example is included as part of Section 5.4 which begins, "If
the conflict cannot be avoided after pursuing the above mechanisms..."  To
reach 5.4 requires that ALL remedies were attempted and none found
acceptable.  That should be an exceedingly rare occurrence assuming that
Legal has no objection to the vote transfer concept.

[KAB] An interesting question arises...  If the Constituencies and/or SGs
do, indeed, own/control their votes, could they transfer a vote from one
Councilor to another (including House NCA) in circumstances beyond COI?  For
example, assume a Councilor cannot register a vote due to serious illness
(e.g. unconscious).  If known in advance, following similar notification
procedures, could the vote be transferred?  If such conditions will be
allowed, perhaps it makes sense to write a generic "vote transfer "
procedure outside of the COI framework and then reference it from within the
above material.

Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Fassett [mailto:rfassett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 7:17 AM
To: ray@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Fwd: [gnso-osc-ops] Abstentions and Conflicts of Interest]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: [gnso-osc-ops] Abstentions and Conflicts of Interest
From:    "Ken Bour" <ken.bour@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:    Thu, November 26, 2009 1:25 pm
To:      "'gnso-osc-ops'" <gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc:      "'Julie Hedlund'" <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>
         "'Robert Hoggarth'" <robert.hoggarth@xxxxxxxxx>
         "'Liz Gasster'" <liz.gasster@xxxxxxxxx>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

To:  GNSO Council Ops Team



As discussed in our teleconference yesterday and noted in Julie's action
item summary, I have prepared the attached DRAFT document, which is proposed
as a set of additional sections that could be incorporated into the GNSO
Operating Procedures on the subjects of Abstentions and Conflicts of
Interest.



.         A version of this material was first published by Staff as a
comment to the Public Forum on GNSO Operating Procedures
(http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-operating-procedures-2009/msg00001.html).


.         In the attached condensed version, I removed the
background/research portions of the original paper and included only the
applicable definition and procedure sections.

.         I attempted to capture my understanding of the team consensus on
various elements and, as a result, rewrote much of the content.   I enabled
track changes in the document so that team members can see how/where the
original material was altered.



I am happy to answer any questions concerning this draft document and to
continue supporting the team to help evolve and perfect these procedures.



Happy Thanksgiving where celebrated.



Ken Bour