RE: [gnso-osc] GNSO Council procedures - avoiding abstention - proxy vote - approval by April 15

["Ray Fassett" <ray@xxxxxxxxx>]

To clarify from WG perspective, a respective SG/C charter would have to be
"brought inline" in order to take advantage of the new proxy procedure being
recommended.  But the autonomy to do so (update of the charter) was to left
to each SG/C to decide on their own if they wanted to.  The proxy procedures
were not intended for those SG/C's that have chosen not to capture it, which
is where I will agree with Ron.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Ray

 

From: owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Ron Andruff
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 10:33 AM
To: 'Philip Sheppard'; gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-osc] GNSO Council procedures - avoiding abstention -
proxy vote - approval by April 15

 

Philip,

 

I am confused.  Can you clarify for me (others?) if the yellow highlighted
text is new suggested language?  If so, it is significant language changes.

 

Wolf-Ulrich and I were on the work team that developed the proxy voting
language (with Ken Bour from staff) and it was my understanding (W-U please
correct me if I am wrong) that all constituency charters would, following
GNSO approval of this new procedure, be brought inline with the new proxy
voting procedures.   If that has not happened, then that is what needs to be
done, in my view.  I do not think that the OSC should try to wordsmith
something to fit an irregularity that needs to be codified in all
constituency charters.

 

Kind regards,

 

RA

 

Ronald N. Andruff

RNA Partners, Inc.

 

  _____  

From: owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Philip Sheppard
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 5:12 AM
To: gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-osc] GNSO Council procedures - avoiding abstention - proxy
vote - approval by April 15

 

For approval April 15

 

As the OSC may be aware Council raised some concern with the current rules
on proxy voting.

Proxy voting is allowed as one remedy to avoid an abstention.

The source of the concern was that the Council rules assumed the existence
of procedures in Constituency charters that were not universal.

 

I attach a proposed version that avoids this assumption while retaining the
essence of the proxy option.

I have also taken the opportunity to simplify language in this section to
avoid ambiguity.

 

Please may I have your approval to recommend this change to Council?

Deadline is April 15.

 

Philip Sheppard

OSC Chair