Re: [soac-mapo] RE: Clarification needed on when higher Board threshold is needed

[Richard Tindal <richardtindal@xxxxxx>]

I agree with Milton.     

Supermajority always required to reject an application  (but that's only time 
supermajority is required).

RT


On Sep 16, 2010, at 4:46 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:

>  
> From: owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf 
> Of Gomes, Chuck
> 
> I think it would help us to clarify various positions on when higher Board 
> threshold is needed.  To facilitate that, let me ask the following questions:
> 1.            Some have been very specific that a 2/3 majority of the Board 
> should be required to uphold an objection.  Am I correct in assuming that 
> this would be the same regardless of the input provided by the expert panel?
> 
> In my preference, yes.
> 
> 2.            Others have said that a 2/3 majority of the Board should be 
> required to approve a string for entry into the root.  Is this also 
> independent of the input from the experts?
> 
> Not applicable to me – I don’t think there should be a 2/3 majority for 
> simple entry into the root. The Board and GNSO have promulgated policies and 
> procedures to be met by applicants. If they meet them, the Board should 
> merely ascertain that and add it to the root. I do not understand the need 
> for a supermajority here. More important, I do not understand the relevance 
> of this question to our CWG WG. If no objection is present, then our 
> discussions don’t apply, do they? Why should we be making policy or
> 
> 3.            The two above questions can probably be asked in one:  Whenever 
> a higher threshold is required for the Board to make a decision on a string, 
> is that threshold independent of the input from the experts?
> 
> Yes (in my preference)
> 
> Assuming that the answer to these questions is yes in each case, it seems 
> like we need to poll support for the following that I think relate to issue 5 
> so I will number them accordingly:
> 
> 5.1  A higher threshold of the Board should be required to uphold an 
> objection.
> 
> 5.2  A higher threshold of the Board should be required to approve a string.
> 
> 5.3  The higher threshold should be at least 2/3.
> 
> 5.4   Approval of a string should only require a simple majority of the Board 
> regardless of the input from the experts.
> 
> 5.5  Approval of a string should only require a simple majority of the Board 
> except when the expert input indicates otherwise, in which case a higher 
> threshold should be required.
> 
> I hope these questions help us narrow down what level agreement we have on 
> these issues.  I believe that it is okay to support more than one of these 
> except where the answers are contradictory. Please feel free to make 
> suggestions, comment and ask questions.
> 
> Margie/Marika – Let’s add these questions to the next Doodle poll, 
> understanding that they might change before we initiate the poll later today.
> 
> Chuck
>