I can't stop you from raising your view as a point of
order. Let's spend some of our Council meeting discussing it as it's
clearly a matter of great concern to you.
Not sure how "at least 8 days" can be interpreted as anything but
eight
24 hour periods, at least on this planet. If it was intended to
mean
anything different it would have been defined as such (8 days or
any
part thereof). A "day" is universally accepted as meaning 24
hours.
Tim
> -------- Original Message --------
>
Subject: RE: [council] Motion deadline per operating procedures
> From:
"Rosette, Kristina"
> Date: Wed, December 01, 2010
11:20 am
> To: "council@gnso.icann.org"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Because Section 3.3 says
"days", the motion was timely as
> long as it was submitted on the
30th, which it was.
>
> If, going forward, the
Council wishes to adopt Tim's
> interpretation, we should amend Section
3.3 to change "8 days" to "192
> hours". Unless and until
such an amendment, my motion was
> timely.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org
> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tim
>
Ruiz
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 12:00 PM
> To:
>
council@gnso.icann.org
> Subject: [council] Motion deadline per
>
operating procedures
>
>
>
> The relevant paragraph
in section 3.3 of our operating
> procedures
> clearly states
that motions must be submitted "...no later than
> 8 days
>
before the GNSO Council meeting." Given that our meeting is
> scheduled
to
> begin at 1900 UTC on the 8th, neither of the motions submitted
> yesterday
> by Mary and Kristina met the deadline of 1900 UTC
the
> 30th.
>
> Again, given that ICANN involves one or
more days of travel for
> many of
> us, and that any 8 day period
also includes at least one weekend,
> I
> think it is crucial
that motions are submitted as soon as possible
> and
> the
deadline should be strictly
> observed.
>
> Tim
>
>
>