Hi,  I am unclear whether these revisions were reviewed and approved by the OSC?  If so, that should be stated clearly in the motion, that the deliverables are from OSC rather than any work team underneath that Steering Committee.  If not, then OSC needs to approve them and send to us.  Please help to clarify this.

 

Thanks,

Mike

 

Mike Rodenbaugh

RODENBAUGH LAW

tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087

http://rodenbaugh.com

 

From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of KnobenW@telekom.de
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:39 AM
To: philip.sheppard@aim.be; ray@goto.jobs; stephane.vangelder@indom.com
Cc: gnso-osc-ops@icann.org; gnso-osc@icann.org; council@gnso.icann.org
Subject: [council] MOTION REFERRING TO THE GNSO COUNCIL OPERATIONS PROCEDURES WORK TEAM (GCOT) RECOMMENDATIONS

 

Colleagues,

The first "Resolved" of the a.m. motion (see https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?18_november_motions) reads:

        RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council accepts these deliverables submitted by the GCOT and approved by the OSC and directs Staff to post the aforementioned document for thirty (30) days in the ICANN Public Comment Forum.

I wonder whether the GCOT has submitted and the OSC has approved the proposed revisions to section 5.0 in the version presented. To my knowledge the OSC approval was given including  the DOI. In this case I'd like to suggest a friendly amendment as follows:

        RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council accepts these deliverables submitted by the GCOT and approved by the OSC and directs Staff to post the aforementioned document for thirty (30) days in the ICANN Public Comment Forum

Philp's and Ray's advise would be helpful.

There are still references to DOI left in the revision which I've removed (see attached).

 

Wolf-Ulrich Knoben

<<GNSO Operating Procedures v2 Section 5 Proposed Revisions without DOI 15 Oct 2010 redline (WUK_edit).doc>>