Hi, While I certainly agree in principle in the 'one council member - one vote' principle, I am curious how it fits in with the rules the GNSO council operates under. Do the rules actually bifurcate between policy votes and other votes? I did not think so, but perhaps I am missing a critical passage or bit of hermeneutics. a. On 10 nov 2006, at 07.48, Greg Ruth wrote:
Philip, I agree whole-heartedly! Greg
--- Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@aim.be> wrote:
Dear Council members,
I feel we should set ourselves some principles upon which we wish to further discussion on matters connected with the two reviews of the GNSO Council and the GNSO. Allow me to propose some.
DISCUSSION BEFORE RESOLUTION
Council should have discussion on selected topics first. Then there should be time to air that discussion with Constituencies and other parties. Then Council should discuss the outcome of that wider discussion. Then Council may consider a resolution.
VOTING
When Council takes any vote, be it indicative or not, the voting basis will be one person, one vote. (There can be no justification for having the policy-related double voting for certain constituencies for matters such as GNSO review. To do so would be especially ironic considering the review proposes the removal of such double votes.)
QUORUM
A proposal for priority discussion should be proposed and seconded and then supported by a majority of constituencies before it is added to a Council agenda. (This should help us to discuss the important things first).
Are we all in agreement with the above ? Are there other principles to help us in our work?
Philip
______________________________________________________________________ ______________ Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/r-index