RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Q5 diversity by-law

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

Thanks Alan.

Chuck 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
> Sent: Sunday, June 07, 2009 3:36 PM
> To: gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Q5 diversity by-law
> 
> 
> That's what I tried to do below.  You only need an exception 
> if you want two members from the same region but have not yet 
> reach 5 regions represented. Except my wording does not 
> require a change if ICANN changes the number of regions.
> 
> Alan
> 
> At 07/06/2009 03:23 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> >No Alan.  Maybe I didn't word it effectively.  What I tried 
> to say was 
> >that each SG would only have to have different regions for 3 
> reps for 
> >the contracted SGs and 5 reps for the noncontracted SGs.  
> Can someone 
> >suggest a better to way to say it?
> >
> >Chuck
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx 
> > > [mailto:owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
> Alan Greenberg
> > > Sent: Sunday, June 07, 2009 11:55 AM
> > > To: gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Q5 diversity by-law
> > >
> > >
> > > As I read that, the non-contracted SGs would need an exemption 
> > > potentially every year (assuming we stay at 5 regions), 
> effectively 
> > > meaning that the entire Council must approve one of their 
> > > Councillors. I find that wrong on several counts.
> > >
> > > Also the "up to the number of seats allocated for that 
> SG" is really 
> > > redundant - there is no way to go above, and the previous part of 
> > > the sentence covers all below the limit. I think a simple 
> change in 
> > > that phrase addresses both issues.
> > >
> > > "Each GNSO Stakeholder Group (SG) Council Representative shall be 
> > > selected from a different ICANN geographic region up to 
> the number 
> > > of ICANN regions. Any exceptions to this requirement 
> shall require a 
> > > 2/3 vote of both houses but in no case shall more than two 
> > > representatives come from the same geographic region."
> > >
> > > Alan
> > >
> > > At 07/06/2009 09:59 AM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> > > >If all of the above are true, then here is some possible 
> language:
> > > >
> > > >"Each GNSO Stakeholder Group (SG) Council Representative 
> shall be 
> > > >selected from a different ICANN geographic region up to the
> > > number of
> > > >seats allocated for that SG.  Any exceptions to this
> > > requirement shall
> > > >require a 2/3 vote of both houses but in no case shall more than 
> > > >two representatives come from the same geographic region."
> > > >
> > > >Thoughts?
> > >
> > >
> 
>