Thank you, James.   I accept the amendments to this motion as friendly. Darcy From: <owner-council@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@godaddy.com> Date: Monday, November 7, 2016 at 10:53 AM To: "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] AMENDMENT - Motion on Conditional Participation of the GNSO as a Chartering Organization for CCWG-IG Councilors – Attached and copied below, please find an amendment to the motion referenced above, in accordance with our discussions during last night’s working session. Darcy Southwell is the original maker of this motion, so I ask that she confirm whether or not she accepts this amendment as “friendly.” We are still seeking a seconder for this motion. Thank you, J. 2. MOTION – Conditional participation of the GNSO as a Chartering Organization for the Cross Community Working Group to discuss Internet governance (CWG-IG) issues affecting ICANN Made by: Darcy Southwell Seconded by: WHEREAS: a) The GNSO Council adopted the charter for a Cross Community Working Group to discuss Internet governance (CWG-IG) issues affecting ICANN and make recommendations to the chartering organization on these issues on 15 October 2014, and as such became a Chartering Organization. b) The Charter foresees that “At each ICANN Annual General Meeting, starting 2014, the Charter and deliverables of the WG shall be reviewed by the participating SO’s and AC’s to determine whether the WG should continue, or, close and be dissolved. Consistent with ICANN community practices, the WG will continue if at least two of the participating SO’s or AC’s extend the Charter of the WG and notify the other participating SO’s and AC’s accordingly one month after the annual review date”. c) The CWG-IG provided its first written status update on 23 June 2016 (see https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/ccwg-internet-governance-23jun16-en.pdf). d) The GNSO Council recently adopted the “Uniform Framework of Principles and Recommendations for Cross Community Working Groups” (CWG Framework) which details the lifecycle of a CCWG including initiation, formation, operation, decision-making, adoption of Final Report by Chartering Organizations and closure of CCWG, and post-closure of CCWG. e) The GNSO Council has observed that the CWG-IG does not follow this lifecycle, nor has it established or adopted an initial work plan and associated schedule as foreseen in its Charter. f) The GNSO Council recognizes the importance of a continued dialogue and discussion in relation to the topic of Internet Governance within an ICANN context. g) The GNSO Council has shared its concerns with the ccNSO Council and representatives of other SO/ACs on the subject of this CWG and its future. RESOLVED: a) The GNSO Council will continue to participate as a Chartering Organization for the CWG-IG. However, this participation is conditioned upon a comprehensive review of the CWG-IG Charter by the CWG-IG, in accordance with the CWG Framework (http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/uniform-framework-principles-recommendations...). In particular, the GNSO Council expects future work to be subject to a clear work plan, with regular updates and clear deliverables. b) The GNSO Council expects that the CWG-IG will present by ICANN58 a report on its findings, which may include a revised charter or a recommendation to reconstitute the group under a new structure. c) Following the submission of the CWG-IG report, the GNSO Council will consider the recommendations and decide whether or not it will continue as a Chartering Organization. d) The GNSO Secretariat will communicate this decision to the CWG-IG Chairs as well as the other Chartering Organizations.