Re: [gnso-restruc-dt] Feedback from SIC

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

hi,

yes i meant 9 Jul.

normally i am a chronoptimist but this was definitely  Freudian  
chronopessismism
thanks for the correction.

a.

On 1 Jul 2009, at 16:09, Gomes, Chuck wrote:

> Thanks Avri.  I assume you meant July 9 instead of Feb 9 in the next  
> to last sentence of your message.
> Chuck
>
> From: owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx 
> ] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 1:11 AM
> To: gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-restruc-dt] Feedback from SIC
>
> Hi,
>
> I received email from Raimundo containing the following:
>
> > Just in case that Roberto didn't had the time to explain it to you,  
> > let me
> > confirm that the idea regarding the seats 13 and 14 is that if the  
> > Council
> > doesn't agree in a wording tomorrow, then the SIC and the Board  
> > will do it,
> > after the Public Comments. Consistently, the appointment by the  
> > Board of
> > three Councillors at the NCSG will be added also by the Boar as a  
> > transition
> > article.
>
> I have responded on the first point concerning the elections, that I  
> did not expect
> the council to be making a decision on that, but rather that the  
> council was still
> waiting on the Board to decide whether it had accepted the idea of  
> the election
> of those seats by the Houses and whether the order previous  
> recommended
> could be changed.
>
> I also let him know that we had delayed our meeting by a week and  
> thanked
> him for the response related to the NCSG.
>
> On the issue issue of the NCSG, their response means that in article  
> XX,
> Section 5.1.4 can now be completed and the comment removed.
>
> d. The three seats currently assigned to the Non-Commercial Users  
> Constituency
> shall be reassigned as three of the seats of the Non-Commercial  
> Stakeholder Group;
> and 3 seats designated by the ICANN Board of Directors.
>
> Given the SIC's position on the Board seat elections, and given that  
> this is as far
> as the Draft team of the Whole was able to get with the sense of the  
> meeting of
> people doing the final walk through in Sydney, I believe this is the  
> last change
> we should make before the staff publishes the draft for community  
> comment.
> Any other changes then can be made by council members offering a  
> specific
> textual amendment that can be voted in in the 9 Feb meeting before  
> we vote
> on the entire bylaw set.  I.e. as the draft team will not be meeting  
> before that council
> meeting, no more 'friendly amendments' can be adopted.
>
> thanks
>
> a.