![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Hi Julf - This has also been a point of discussion, and hope to have a full discussion on Thursday. Generally, I believe we will vote on each CCWG recommendation, either voice vote (if not objections) or roll call vote. On each issue, the Council will consider the question of whether or not the harmonized statement reflects the consolidated position of the GNSO, including any conditions or unmet concerns expressed in SG/C comments. It will be a yes(Support) or no(Object) vote, with any abstentions having the effect of ³Support². One point on which we have been consistent is that the GNSO response is limited to only the CCWG Third Draft, and is not responding to comments filed by the Board or other groups. This is essential to allow the CCWG to proceed on any next (final?) draft and its work on WS2. Hope this is helpful! Thanks‹ J. On 1/11/16, 5:59 , "owner-council@gnso.icann.org on behalf of Johan Helsingius" <owner-council@gnso.icann.org on behalf of julf@julf.com> wrote:
Everybody,
I am curious as how we intend to determine the outcome on Thursday. Do we intend to do a separate voting point on each item in the draft? How do we reach a trinary result (general support / limited support / no support) using simple majority?
Personally I am not too happy with those 3 alternatives. To me, the real alternatives (for each point) are something like:
- "No issues" - "Not happy with the current wording, but can live with it if it is a show-stopper for the IANA transition" - "Should be refined as part of work stream 2" - "No go. Show stopper."
And for those points where the board has expressed reservations, I guess one more alternative is "Can live with current wording, but any major back pedalling will be a show stopper and needs another comment round".
What would be really helpful would be some indication of what the real show stopper points are from the point of view of the IANA transition - to me it seems many of the points in the current draft could (and probably should) really be in work stream 2.
Julf