RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Followup from the meeting.
Please see my responses below. Chuck > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx > [mailto:owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz > Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 7:38 AM > To: Avri Doria > Cc: gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Followup from the meeting. > > > Avri, > > These two items do not jive. Shouldn't the latter be changed > to "...increased to be six..."? > > Article X Section 1: > d. six representatives selected from the Non-Commercial > Stakeholder Group; and Chuck: I think you mean 'ARTICLE X: GENERIC NAMES SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION; SECTION 3. GNSO COUNCIL' > > Article XX Section 5: > d. The three seats currently assigned to the Non-Commercial > Users Constituency shall be reassigned as three seats of the > Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group. Chuck: I thought the same thing when I first read this but I believe that this item is only dealing with what happens to the existing constituency seats, so I do not believe they are inconsistent. Does that make sense? > > Tim > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [gnso-restruc-dt] Followup from the meeting. > From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx> > Date: Mon, June 08, 2009 5:34 pm > To: gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx > > > > Hi, > > I have edited the text. It can be found at: > https://st.icann.org/gnso_transition/index.cgi?proposed_by_laws > > I think I caught it all but it needs to be checked. > > In terms of motions and voting, I propose the following: > > - the motion included below be put in the schedule of 24 > June. I will put myself down as the person making the motion. > It will of course need a second. > > - any wording changes that we can reach consensus on on this > list, can be treated as friendly amendments and just put in > before the vote. > Since I will be making the motion of behalf of this team, it > is the consensus of this team that will indicate whether it > is a friendly amendment or not. > > - any changes we cannot reach consensus on, can be voted on > as amendments before voting on the main motion. Of course > someone will have to make and second these motions. > > By doing this, we can both present the rough consensus > position to the Board as well as the results of any minority > positions. > > The motion: > > Whereas > > Insert long history here that includes, review, BCG, Board > approval of BCG, work of the team of the whole and SIC > response: (hopefully staff can help in writing this chronology) > > Resolved > > The GNSO recommends that the By-laws related to the GNSO > council be amended to read as follows: > > insert the text either by inclusion or reference: > https://st.icann.org/gnso_transition/index.cgi?proposed_by_laws > > > thanks > > a. > > >