unfortunately, the Board will note that the two constituencies reps weren't in attendance to abstain or vote no. I am not sure that the 'quorum' issue will have any favor with the Board in this instance. Marilyn S. Cade 202 360 1196 or 202 251 6787 mscade@att.net or marilynscade@hotmail.com
CC: bc-gnso@icann.org From: lizawilliams@mac.com To: philip.sheppard@aim.be Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] Notification of results in GNSO Council vote on Recommended By Laws changes Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:29:48 +0100
Many thanks Philip -- that helps.
The Board really need to know the status of this -- it is, by any reading, not a consensus motion and remains structurally flawed.
Liz ...
Liz Williams +44 1963 364 380 +44 7824 877757
On 15 Jul 2009, at 08:51, Philip Sheppard wrote:
Liz, I have recently posted this follow-up to the Board after losing the argument on Council. Philip ----------------- To the Board;
This constitutes additional notification to the Board, to the Structural Improvements Committee of the Board and to the Public Comments area, on the motion concerning the recommended By Laws changes in support of GNSO restructuring as mandated by the Board. --------------------------------------------------------------------
Please note there was considerable unease about the GNSO Council taking this vote before the closure of public comments and while key by-laws changes (Board seats, NCSG seating) were not yet embedded in proposed text. The vote taken was technically a pass at a barely quorate meeting. The following may be of assistance to the Board in understanding the level of support of the GNSO vote:
1. Of the 21 members of Council, 7 members voted in favour. 2. Of the 6 GNSO Constituencies, only 2 voted in favour.
Philip Sheppard