RE: [gnso-rap-dt] For review - draft motion

["Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@xxxxxxx>]

I *think* it's been handled on an ad hoc basis by each WG up until the
FFWG.  I wasn't involved in that drafting team so I don't know the
origin of the language.
 
 


________________________________

        From: Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 1:01 PM
        To: Rosette, Kristina; gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx
        Subject: Re: [gnso-rap-dt] For review - draft motion
        
        
        Kristina, I copied this section from the Fast Flux Working Group
Charter. I assumed that these served as the current guidelines for
Working Groups, but I might be wrong here as these were adopted by the
Council before I joined ICANN. How was this handled in the past? I am
more than happy to leave it out and have the GNSO Council discuss which
processes should apply to the Working Group.
        
        Best regards,
        
        Marika
        
        
        On 2/9/09 6:54 PM, "Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@xxxxxxx> wrote:
        
        

                Where did the Working Group Processes section come from?
I've never seen that text before and don't recall our discussing it.
(If I'm wrong on the latter point, please let me know.)  With the
exception of that section, I'm fine with the motion.  I have no
objection to changing the time window to 90 days as Beau suggested.  I
have no objection to Greg's suggested amendment.  
                
                As for the Working Group Processes section, I would
prefer that it be deleted.  If these are the processes to apply, the
decision should be made by the Council and should apply to all WGs - not
just this one.  This is beyond our remit.  As for the substance itself,
I believe the more appropriate terminology for the minority report
should be minority statement.  The persons with the minority view aren't
going to be submitting their own report, right?  In that case, a
"statement" is more accurate.
                
                I have no availability for a call before the 12th.  (I'm
in SF for the INTA Internet Forum and won't be back in DC until
Thursday.)
                
                K
                
                

                        
                         
                        
________________________________

                        From: owner-gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marika  Konings
                        Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 2:18 PM
                        To:  gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx
                        Subject: [gnso-rap-dt] For review - draft
motion
                        
                         
                        Dear All,
                        
                        As mentioned in my previous e-mail,  please find
attached a draft motion for review. Please note that the motion  will
need to be provided to the Council at the latest by Thursday 12 February
in order to be considered at the next GNSO Council meeting on 19
February.  Please share your comments and edits with the list.
                        
                        Best  regards,
                        
                        Marika