RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Q9. Section 3.6 a & b: 13 and 14 switch

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I inserted one comment below.

Chuck 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Margie Milam
> Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 12:54 PM
> To: Gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Q9. Section 3.6 a & b: 13 and 14 switch
> 
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> To assist your discussions on these questions, I thought it 
> would be useful to provide the current proposed language on 
> the table related to these questions.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Margie Milam
> Senior Policy Counselor
> ICANN
> ______________________________________________________________
> _________________________________________________
> 
> Currently Proposed Revisions:
> 
> 6. Each of the two GNSO Houses, as described in Section 3(8) 
> of this Article (link TBD), shall make a selection to fill 
> one of two ICANN Board seats, as outlined below, by written 
> ballot or by action at a meeting; any such selection must 
> have affirmative votes comprising 60% of all the respective 
> voting house members:  
> 
> a.  the Contracted Party & Suppliers House shall select Seat 
> 13; and b. the Users & Providers House shall select Seat 14 .
> ______________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 9:38 PM
> To: Gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-restruc-dt] Q9. Section 3.6 a & b: 13 and 14 switch
> 
> 
> Q9. Section 3.6 a & b: 13 and 14 switch
> 
> A proposal was made that seat 13 be assigned to the 
> Non-Contracted Parties House and that seat 14 be assigned to 
> the Contracted Parties house.
> 
> Should this change be made?

Chuck: I have concerns about making changes to key elements of the total
restructuring package that we agreed to because the consensus agreement
we reached was done with full consideration of all the various
interdependencies.  To be more specific, the RyC decided to support the
restructuing recommendations based on the total package; we did not
evaluate individual elements of the recommendations independently but
rather by looking at all of them as a whole.  If we change any one key
element, that might cause some to re-evaluate their position of support
for the entire package.
 
> 
> 
>