That is the term used for this situation in Section 7.4 of
the BC Charter, so it would take a Charter amendment to change
it.
Philip S. Corwin
Partner
Butera & Andrews
1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Suite 500
Washington, DC
20004
202-347-6875 (office)
202-347-6876 (fax)
202-255-6172 (cell)
"Luck is the residue of
design." -- Branch
Rickey
I would strongly advocate against the use of the term 'minority
position'.
Sincerely,
Zahid Jamil
Barrister-at-law
Jamil &
Jamil
Barristers-at-law
219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
Merewether Road,
Karachi. Pakistan
Cell: +923008238230
Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 /
5655025
Fax: +92 21 5655026
www.jamilandjamil.com
Notice /
Disclaimer
This message contains confidential information and its contents
are being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the
intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this
e-mail.
Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received
this message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may
contain/are the intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law,
and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege.
The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind
whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any
medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some
other use of this communication) without prior written permission and consent of
Jamil & Jamil is prohibited.
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless
device
From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@netchoice.org>
Sender: owner-bc-gnso@icann.org
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:28:37 +0000
To: 'bc - GNSO list'<bc-gnso@icann.org>
Subject: [bc-gnso] Results of BC poll on DAGv4 comments
From: Steve DelBianco, vice chair for policy
coordination
To: BC Members
( Background
on this policy poll appears at the end of this email )
On 26-July, GNSO
Secretariat (Glen de Saint Géry) downloaded and counted ballots for the two BC
position statements on DAGv4.
Glen reported there were 24 (twenty four) votes (incl
1 abstention) in the bcvote@bizconst.org mailbox.
Glen opened, logged, and counted each vote. The
results:
a) With respect to the "Points 1-3" there were
18 votes of "Support" and 4 votes of "Do not Support". (One person did not
vote in this category)
b) With respect to the "Rights
Protection Mechanism" there were 18 votes of "Support" and 5 votes of "Do
not Support".
***end of Glen’s report***
24 ballots
represents 47% of 51 eligible members. While the BC poll shows
significant majority support (82% on points 1-3 and 78% on RPMs), we did
not reach the quorum required by our Charter, Section
7.4:
A position paper which has the support of at least
a simple majority of 51% of the eligible votes in favour will be deemed
adopted by the Constituency so long as the total number of members voting
represents not less than a quorum of 50% of paid-up members. Where a quorum is
not reached the Executive Committee will decide whether a re-vote, re-thinking
of the position or publication of a minority position is required and the
process will then repeat as appropriate. http://www.bizconst.org/charter.htm
Before the results were in, the Executive Committee
approved a process in the event quorum was not
achieved:
Since quorum was not achieved, the Executive Committee
will submit the 2 position statements to ICANN as minority positions, per
Section 7.4 of the BC Charter. That is, these positions were
approved by a clear majority of those voting, but the number of voters was 2
short of the required quorum of 26 (50% of 51eligible
voters).
On the attached position for "Points 1-3", 18 BC
members voted to support, 4 members voted "Do not Support,” and there was 1
abstention. [attach position]
On the attached position for
"Rights Protection Mechanisms", 18 BC members voted to support, while 5
members voted "Do not Support.” [attach
position]
Using the
description above, we will post these 2 position documents to ICANN’s public
comment forum today. Each comment includes a note explaining the
voting and failure to reach quorum.
Last week, we alerted staff that the
BC would be a few days late with our comments.
*** background
emails below ***
From:
Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@netchoice.org>
Date:
Tue, 20 Jul 2010 18:38:24 -0400
To: 'bc - GNSO list' <bc-gnso@icann.org>
Subject:
Documents and ballot for BC Comments on DAGv4 (poll closes noon EDT Friday
23-Jul-2010)
As
described in our previous note (repeated below), the BC is now polling members
to determine support for proposed comments on Draft Applicant Guidebook version
4 (DAGv4).
Attached are three documents:
*** Comment part 1:
DAGv4 BC points 1-3.pdf
Points 1thru 3: This proposed comment is a
restatement of prior BC comments regarding: market differentiation; translations
and IDN versions of gTLDs; and community-based evaluation scoring.
Our Rapporteur Ron Andruff updated these prior comments to reflect some
recommendations of the latest economic analysis provided to ICANN.
*** Comment part 2: DAGv4 BC points on
RPMs.pdf
Rights Protection Mechanisms. Sarah Deutsch and Jon
Nevett collaborated on this proposed comment, which is based upon the BC
“minority statement” we approved and submitted on a previous draft of the
DAG.
*** A blank ballot form: BC Polling Form
20-Jul-2010.doc, where you can indicate support or non-support for each of these
2 proposed comments.
Voting instructions for BC
members:
Attached is your ballot form. Please complete your
ballot and save the document to your local computer. Then attach
your saved ballot to an email and send to bcvote@bizconst.org
Please use the subject line "DAG4 Comments Vote". You will
receive an auto confirmation
of your email.
This mailbox will retain
all the ballot emails. Nobody on the Executive Committee has access to
this mailbox at this time.
When the voting closes at 12:00 noon EDT on
Friday 23-July-2010, we will arrange for our Secretariat (or another neutral
party) to access and tally the ballots.
Reminder: please submit
your ballot by 12:00 noon EDT on Friday 23-July-2010.
Thanks to all who
contributed to these draft comments.
------ Forwarded
Message
From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@netchoice.org>
Date:
Tue, 20 Jul 2010 13:14:38 -0400
To: 'bc - GNSO list' <bc-gnso@icann.org>
Cc:
"excomm@bizconst.org" <excomm@bizconst.org>
Subject:
Process and polling for BC Comments on DAGv4
From: Marilyn Cade (BC
Chair) and Steve DelBianco (vice chair for policy coordination)
to:
BC members
Comments on DAGv4 are due to
ICANN on 21-July. Ron Andruff volunteered to be BC Rapporteur and worked
with Sarah Deutsch to circulate a draft on 14-July.
For the last week,
about a dozen BC members debated and exchanged alternate drafts via email.
During that discussion, at least 5 BC members expressed opposition
to the comment draft. If opposition reaches 15% of paid membership,
section 7.4 in our Charter is triggered:
7.4. Approval where there is continued
disagreement
Where the discussion mechanism indicates a split in the
Constituency of more than 15% of the number of members, there will then be a
vote (typically by e-mail) on the position. Only the designated
representatives of members will be eligible to vote.
A position paper
which has the support of at least a simple majority of 51% of the eligible
votes in favour will be deemed adopted by the Constituency so long as the
total number of members voting represents not less than a quorum of 50% of
paid-up members. Where a quorum is not reached the Executive Committee will
decide whether a re-vote, re-thinking of the position or publication of a
minority position is required and the process will then repeat as
appropriate.
http://www.bizconst.org/charter.htm
The ability of the BC to comment on DAG 4 is
important to many of the members.
The time line has to be modified to do
follow the polling process in our charter.
The majority of your executive
committee supports giving a clean document to members to vote/poll in a
shortened time frame.
We respect that some of you may not be in agreement
with the decision. However, we see no other way to achieve a submission within a
reasonable time frame. Although it will be 2 days late, it will be within a
reasonable time frame to be considered by ICANN.
Ron Andruff is working
with a few others on a clean document that he will distribute by 4pm EDT today.
The goal is to for this document to get as close as we can to a consensus
that all BC members can vote on.
Ron may also distribute additional
section(s) that would be subject to a separate vote.
We will then conduct
a formal members poll to close by noon EDT, Friday 23-July.
We understand
that this is not the best option. But given time pressures, and the work
that has gone into this from all members, we want to ensure that we do all we
can to have as much agreement on a core submission as we can, and that we find
ways to hear the voices and concerns of all members.
------ End of Forwarded
Message