Re: [gnso-osc] RE: Motion to Approve CSG Recommendations

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

You may be right, they may not be substantive and they may not merit change.  
but I thought the new practice we were engaging in involved having the group 
that authored the report reading and responding to comments.  After all someone 
took the time to read and comment so maybe the group needs to read and respond. 
 If the comments and responses are straightforward they can probably do it on 
email and don't have to spend weeks working on response like some other groups 
have had to.

Nonetheless I think we owe those who comment that much.

a.

On 2 Jun 2010, at 22:08, Gomes, Chuck wrote:

> I have avoided making this motion because I thought it would be better coming 
> from someone other than the Council Chair.  But no one else on the Council 
> has made it.  Should I assume that it is premature and the OSC needs to 
> consider the comments further as Avri suggested?
> 
> 
> Chuck
> 
> 
> _____________________________________________
> From: Gomes, Chuck
> Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 7:52 PM
> To: gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Motion to Approve CSG Recommendations
> Importance: High
> 
> 
> A draft motion was prepared to approve the CSG WT recommendations but no 
> Councilor has made the motion yet and the deadline for motions is Wednesday, 
> 2 June. 
> 
> Avri asked whether the report should be referred back to the WT to address 
> the comments.  I think I was the only one on this list who responded and, in 
> my opinion, the comments were of such a nature that I didn’t think they 
> warranted that action.  We now have 24 hours or less for a motion to be made. 
>  If any Councilors on this list support action being considered on 10 June, 
> then I suggest that you make the motion on the Council list.  We could still 
> pull it back or change it if needed.
> 
> Chuck
> 
> Here’s the draft motion that Julie sent on 28 May.
> 
> DRAFT COUNCIL RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO CCT FINAL CONSOLIDATED REPORT
> 
> WHEREAS, the GNSO Council, at its 21 May 2010 meeting, accepted the 
> deliverable of the Communications and Coordination Work Team (CCT) as its 
> final set of recommendations;
>  
> WHEREAS, a twenty-one (21) day Public Comment Forum 
> <http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-23apr10-en.htm>  
> completed between 23 April 2010 and 16 May 2010 and a Staff Summary and 
> Analysis <http://forum.icann.org/lists/cct-recommendations/msg00004.html>  
> has been prepared;
>  
> WHEREAS, the GNSO Council agreed to take action on the CCT's recommendations 
> as soon as possible after the end of the public comment period;
>  
> NOW, BE IT THEREFORE:
>  
> RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council approves the Final Consolidated Report 
> <http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/cct-consolidated-report-final-09apr10-en.pdf>  
> of the CCT, without further modification, and directs Staff to begin work on 
> implementation.  
>  
> RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council accepts the CCT’s specific 
> recommendation to convene a standing committee whose role will be to monitor, 
> coordinate, and manage the continuing implementation of the various 
> recommendations emanating from the chartered GNSO Improvements Work Teams;
>  
> RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council appreciates the thoughtful feedback 
> of those community members who contributed to the Public Comment Forum 
> <http://forum.icann.org/lists/cct-recommendations/>  and directs Staff to 
> consider their suggestions and recommendations during the implementation 
> phase;
>  
> RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council hereby discharges the CCT and 
> expresses its gratitude and appreciation for the team’s dedication, 
> commitment, and thoughtful recommendations.
> 
>