Thank-you for the prompt response Julie. Jonathan From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: 17 December 2012 23:25 To: john@crediblecontext.com Cc: council@gnso.icann.org List; Mason Cole Subject: Re: [council] Conflicts and the Draft reply to Fadi John, Thank you for your question with respect to conflicts of interest. Here is some information that may be helpful. The GNSO Council Operating Procedures (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/gnso-operating-procedures-13sep12-en.pdf) differentiate between "conflicts of interest" and "statements of interest." The Procedures contain requirements relating to Statements of interest in Section 5.0. These are defined as, "A written statement made by a Relevant Party that provides a declaration of interests that may affect the Relevant Party's judgement, on any matters to be considered by the GNSO Group. " These statements of interest are to be provided by any member of a GNSO Group (such as the Council, but also Working Groups) to the Secretariat not less frequently than once a year and at the beginning of a GNSO Group meeting the Chair asks if members have updates to their statements of interest. Below I've included the questions that form the content of the statement of interest. The Procedures also reference "conflicts of interest," but only in the context of a disclaimer (see excerpt from Section 4.5, Obligational Abstentions, below) that refers to the Statements of Interest procedures and notes that these statements do not require that the Councilor abstain from participating and voting. In particular, section 4.5 notes as follows: ".the term "Conflict of Interest" will not pertain when a GNSO Councilor argues for and votes "Yes" or "No" on a matter which, by virtue of that action, directly or indirectly benefits that individual financially or economically; however, that interpretation does not imply that circumstances cannot occur in which a Councilor may perceive his/her situation as obligating a formal abstention." With respect to abstentions, the "Obligational Abstention" (see details below) perhaps addresses what you refer to as "conflict of interest." That is, it allows a Councilor to abstain from a vote as follows and provides cases as examples (see below): "A Councilor who believes that proceeding to vote on a motion or action before the Council not only warrants, but requires, his/her abstention and, thereby, recusal from deliberations, is considered to be facing an obligational abstention." I hope that this is helpful, but please let me know if you need more information or have more questions. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Excerpted from GNSO Council Operating Procedures, Section 5.3.3, page 21 5.3.3 Content Relevant Parties shall complete all six sections of the Statement of Interest form as specified below: 1. Please identify your current employer(s) and position(s). 2. Please identify your declared country of primary residence (which may be the country to which you pay taxes). 3. Please identify the type(s) of work performed at #1 above. 4. Please list any financial relationship beyond de minimus stock ownership you may have with any company that to your knowledge has a financial relationship or contract with ICANN. 5. Do you believe you are participating in the GNSO policy process as a representative of any individual or entity,whether paid or unpaid? Please answer "yes" or "no." If the answer is "yes," please provide the name of the represented individual or entity. If professional ethical obligations prevent you from disclosing this information, please so state. 6. Please identify any other relevant arrangements, interests, or benefits as requested in the following two questions: i. Do you have any type of material interest in ICANN GNSO policy development processes and outcomes? Please answer "yes" or "no." If the answer is "yes," please describe the material interest in ICANN GNSO policy development processes and outcomes. ii. Are there any arrangements/agreements between you and any other group, constituency or person(s) regarding your participation as a work team member? Please answer "yes" or "no." If the answer is "yes," please describe the arrangements/agreements and the name of the group, constituency, or person(s). Excerpted from GNSO Council Operating Procedures, Section 4.5, Abstentions, page 15 a. Obligational Abstentions This category of abstentions results from conditions in which a Councilor may find that he/she is unable to vote on a measure due to a competing personal (e.g. religious), professional, or political interest that interferes with his/her ability to participate in the matter or where participation raises ethical questions. Disclaimer concerning the term "Conflict of Interest": There are certain financial interests and, possibly, incentives associated with GNSO actions that affect Internet domain name policies. As they pertain to GNSO Council voting actions, such interests are expected to be documented in a Councilor's required Statement of Interest (see Chapter 5.0 <applewebdata://C6470B06-97BB-49EC-9D50-8234F30229D9#_Chapter_5.0:_Statement s_2> ) and do not require that the Councilor abstain from participating and voting. GNSO Councilors do not have a fiduciary responsibility to act in the best interests of ICANN in discharging their responsibilities on the Council. While the deliberations and decisions of ICANN are made in the interests of the global Internet community as a whole, GNSO Councilors are understood, in some cases, to represent the views of organizations and interest groups that would materially benefit from policies recommended by the GNSO. It is understood that Councilors are often employed by or represent those affected parties and such relationships could engender subsequent benefit to Councilors as individuals. As a result of these special circumstances and to avoid confusion with ICANN's Conflict of Interest Policy, which does not pertain to GNSO Council matters, the term "Conflict of Interest" will not pertain when a GNSO Councilor argues for and votes "Yes" or "No" on a matter which, by virtue of that action, directly or indirectly benefits that individual financially or economically; however, that interpretation does not imply that circumstances cannot occur in which a Councilor may perceive his/her situation as obligating a formal abstention. A Councilor who believes that proceeding to vote on a motion or action before the Council not only warrants, but requires, his/her abstention and,thereby, recusal from deliberations, is considered to be facing an obligational abstention. Although it is not possible to draft a set of exhaustive conditions under which obligational abstentions can arise, two examples are provided by way of illustration: Case 1: a Councilor (attorney by profession) is representing a client in legal actionrelating to a matter before the Council and, and as required by his/her professional code, must abstain and, furthermore, such abstention should not be counted as a negative vote. [Note: this type of situation requires the remedy specified in Paragraph 4.5.3 <applewebdata://C6470B06-97BB-49EC-9D50-8234F30229D9#_4.5.3_Remedy_To_1> below]. Case 2: a Councilor is a paid consultant for a national political body that has a vested interest in a particular motion before the Council. The Councilor is concerned that his/her future income potential and ability to retain a consulting engagement with the national body may be affected if he/she votes on the measure. In such a case, the Councilor believes that the ethical course of action is to abstain. In the two examples above, personal or professional obligations interfere with the Council member's ability to participate ethically; thus, requiring recusal from deliberations on the matter and abstention from voting. From: "john@crediblecontext.com" <john@crediblecontext.com> Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 12:00 PM To: Mason Cole <mcole@5x5com.com>, "council@gnso.icann.org List" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] Conflicts and the Draft reply to Fadi Jonathan, et. al., Before I offer comment on Mason's draft and before we convene on Thursday can I get some guidance on how those of us who have a conflict on the matter of new gTLDs should conduct ourselves or offer input? Cheers, John Berard Founder Credible Context 58 West Portal Avenue, #291 San Francisco, CA 94127 m: 415.845.4388 -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [council] Draft reply to Fadi From: Mason Cole <mcole@5x5com.com> Date: Fri, December 14, 2012 11:11 am To: "council@gnso.icann.org List" <council@gnso.icann.org> Council colleagues -- I have taken the liberty of drafting a reply to Fadi's request for Council advice on the BC/IPC request for more RPMs. Jonathan and I have spoken about a process from here and I am happy to keep the pen for possible suggestions and edits. Speaking for myself, though I realize the holidays are fast approaching I would hope we can get a communication to Fadi expeditiously. Many thanks -- Mason

Thanks Joy, I am mindful of the short time between now and the Council meeting. Also of the issues that time zones create. Therefore I want to respond quickly. My personal thoughts on this are that Councillors can contribute from two key positions: 1. As a representative of the group they represent on the Council 2. In their individual capacity It will be helpful if Councillors can be clear in which capacity they are contributing. In the case of 1 above, I trust that this has been discussed to some extent in the groups / constituencies and therefore that councillors may be in a position to represent group positions. In the case of 2 above, we have SOI's from individual councillors so that helps to inform us. After that, it may be down to a matter of judgement by councillors as to whether or not they contribute or not to a specific portion of the discussion. I stress here that I have responded rapidly to try to assist and am open to any other contributions on this, particularly to the extent that they are based on existing bylaws or procedures. Joy, I understand that you are seeking guidance but do you (or the NCSG to the extent that you are aware of it) have a firm view on this issue? Jonathan -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of joy Sent: 18 December 2012 22:05 To: Julie Hedlund Cc: john@crediblecontext.com; council@gnso.icann.org List; Mason Cole Subject: Re: [council] Conflicts and the Draft reply to Fadi -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Thanks Julie, and John for raising this. Given that John's question relates not to a motion, but to a matter of Council business (the draft reply to Fadi), it would appear that the Council operating procedures cited here do not apply. If so, can I ask what guidance can Council offer (or be offered) on the point John has raised (particularly in light of how the Board has dealt with conflicts of interest and recent sensitivities on this topic). Cheers Joy On 18/12/2012 12:24 p.m., Julie Hedlund wrote:

John,

Thank you for your question with respect to conflicts of interest. Here is some information that may be helpful.

The GNSO Council Operating Procedures (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/gnso-operating-procedures-13sep12-en. pdf)

differentiate between "conflicts of interest" and "statements of

interest." The Procedures contain requirements relating to Statements of interest in Section 5.0. These are defined as, "A written statement made by a Relevant Party that provides a declaration of interests that may affect the Relevant Party's judgement, on any matters to be considered by the GNSO Group. " These statements of interest are to be provided by any member of a GNSO Group (such as the Council, but also Working Groups) to the Secretariat not less frequently than once a year and at the beginning of a GNSO Group meeting the Chair asks if members have updates to their statements of interest. Below I've included the questions that form the content of the statement of interest.

The Procedures also reference "conflicts of interest," but only in the context of a disclaimer (see excerpt from Section 4.5, Obligational Abstentions, below) that refers to the Statements of Interest procedures and notes that these statements do not require that the Councilor abstain from participating and voting. In particular, section 4.5 notes as follows:

/".the term "Conflict of Interest" will not pertain when a GNSO Councilor argues for and votes "Yes" or "No" on a matter which, by virtue of that action, directly or indirectly benefits that individual financially or economically; however, that interpretation does not imply that circumstances cannot occur in which a Councilor may perceive his/her situation as obligating a formal abstention." /

With respect to abstentions, the "Obligational Abstention" (see details below) perhaps addresses what you refer to as "conflict of interest." That is, it allows a Councilor to abstain from a vote as follows and provides cases as examples (see below):

"A Councilor who believes that proceeding to vote on a motion or action before the Council not only warrants, but requires, his/her abstention and, thereby, recusal from deliberations, is considered to be facing an obligational abstention."

I hope that this is helpful, but please let me know if you need more information or have more questions.

Best regards,

Julie

Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

*Excerpted from GNSO Council Operating Procedures, Section 5.3.3, page 21*

5.3.3 _Content_

Relevant Parties shall complete all six sections of the Statement of Interest form as specified below:

1. Please identify your current employer(s) and position(s).

2. Please identify your declared country of primary residence (which may be the country to which you pay taxes).

3. Please identify the type(s) of work performed at #1 above.

4. Please list any financial relationship beyond /de minimus/ stock ownership you may have with any company that to your knowledge has a financial relationship or contract with ICANN.

5. Do you believe you are participating in the GNSO policy process as a representative of any individual or entity,whether paid or unpaid? Please answer "yes" or "no." If the answer is "yes," please provide the name of the represented individual or entity. If professional ethical obligations prevent you from disclosing this information, please so state.

6. Please identify any other relevant arrangements, interests, or benefits as requested in the following two questions:

i. Do you have any type of material interest in ICANN GNSO policy development processes and outcomes? Please answer "yes" or "no." If the answer is "yes," please describe the material interest in ICANN GNSO policy development processes and outcomes.

ii. Are there any arrangements/agreements between you and any other group, constituency or person(s) regarding your participation as a work team member? Please answer "yes" or "no." If the answer is "yes," please describe the arrangements/agreements and the name of the group, constituency, or person(s).

*Excerpted from GNSO Council Operating Procedures, Section 4.5, Abstentions, page 15*

a. _Obligational Abstentions_

This category of abstentions results from conditions in which a Councilor may find that he/she is unable to vote on a measure due to a competing personal (e.g. religious), professional, or political interest that interferes with his/her ability to participate in the matter or where participation raises ethical questions.

/_Disclaimer concerning the term "Conflict of Interest"_//: There are certain financial interests and, possibly, incentives associated with GNSO actions that affect Internet domain name policies. As they pertain to GNSO Council voting actions, such interests are expected to be documented in a Councilor's required Statement of Interest (see Chapter 5.0 <applewebdata://C6470B06-97BB-49EC-9D50-8234F30229D9#_Chapter_5.0:_Sta tements_2>)

and do not require that the Councilor abstain from participating and

voting. //GNSO Councilors do not have a fiduciary responsibility to act in the best interests of ICANN in discharging their responsibilities on the Council. While the deliberations and decisions of ICANN are made in the interests of the global Internet community as a whole, GNSO Councilors are understood, in some cases, to represent the views of organizations and interest groups that would materially benefit from policies recommended by the GNSO. It is understood that Councilors are often employed by or represent those affected parties and such relationships could engender subsequent benefit to Councilors as individuals. As a result of these special circumstances and to avoid confusion with ICANN's Conflict of Interest Policy, which does not pertain to GNSO Council matters, the term "Conflict of Interest" will not pertain when a GNSO Councilor argues for and votes "Yes" or "No" on a matter which, by virtue of that action, directly or indirectly benefits that individual financially or economically; however, that interpretation does not imply that circumstances cannot occur in which a Councilor may perceive his/her situation as obligating a formal abstention. /

A Councilor who believes that proceeding to vote on a motion or action before the Council not only warrants, but requires, his/her abstention and,thereby, recusal from deliberations, is considered to be facing an obligational abstention. Although it is not possible to draft a set of exhaustive conditions under which obligational abstentions can arise, two examples are provided by way of illustration:

_Case 1_: a Councilor (attorney by profession) is representing a client in legal actionrelating to a matter before the Council and, and as required by his/her professional code, must abstain and, furthermore, such abstention should not be counted as a negative vote. [Note: this type of situation requires the remedy specified in Paragraph 4.5.3 <applewebdata://C6470B06-97BB-49EC-9D50-8234F30229D9#_4.5.3_Remedy_To_ 1> below].

_Case 2_: a Councilor is a paid consultant for a national political body that has a vested interest in a particular motion before the Council. The Councilor is concerned that his/her future income potential and ability to retain a consulting engagement with the national body may be affected if he/she votes on the measure. In such a case, the Councilor believes that the ethical course of action is to abstain.

In the two examples above, personal or professional obligations interfere with the Council member's ability to participate ethically; thus, requiring recusal from deliberations on the matter and abstention from voting.

From: "john@crediblecontext.com <mailto:john@crediblecontext.com>" <john@crediblecontext.com <mailto:john@crediblecontext.com>> Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 12:00 PM To: Mason Cole <mcole@5x5com.com <mailto:mcole@5x5com.com>>, "council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> List" <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [council] Conflicts and the Draft reply to Fadi

Jonathan, et. al.,

Before I offer comment on Mason's draft and before we convene on Thursday can I get some guidance on how those of us who have a conflict on the matter of new gTLDs should conduct ourselves or offer input?

Cheers,

John Berard Founder Credible Context 58 West Portal Avenue, #291 San Francisco, CA 94127 m: 415.845.4388

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [council] Draft reply to Fadi From: Mason Cole <mcole@5x5com.com <mailto:mcole@5x5com.com>> Date: Fri, December 14, 2012 11:11 am To: "council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> List" <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>>

Council colleagues --

I have taken the liberty of drafting a reply to Fadi's request for Council advice on the BC/IPC request for more RPMs. Jonathan and I have spoken about a process from here and I am happy to keep the pen for possible suggestions and edits. Speaking for myself, though I realize the holidays are fast approaching I would hope we can get a communication to Fadi expeditiously.

Many thanks --

Mason

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQ0OhyAAoJEA9zUGgfM+bqJH4H/0/Dvt354b5iU9JfFQGX0gHp 34RgWSiGin5iTn9u89XiH+QM4BsudJrqs7fxgcQ7vlioy7KObYeBp5oERLdnajw4 3DkgUENys9DBVklut6Rwsd7yOWBLleoNP+DC3ZQYputUXGa6WyS/+kLVAnPZkTYB bFWXjIo8OOPTsV3BMeF0JcQplVB6xWujYCKzKro0oq+ZJfp1PWr4FhCHV+Dcq4nj 9hJbV/+ydZ1IqRo+RQqWF/ou92/INdUFAgXCbtgfT9JyaZJ+RP97YWIC9DtP/Xtf 8Eh7KDvOO740FjnMXJHy13zKMG1q8DMpUXF1r+zsIRPvju/IODVmViF+nqmyOyY= =+XYF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

I appreciate the point that the substance of the topic is about the reply to Fadi. However, if the other issue ensures councillors are a little better informed on the operating procedures, it's probably a welcome benefit. Accordingly, please note the following (explanatory text immediately following section 4.5.2 b on Obligational Abstentions): Disclaimer concerning the term "Conflict of Interest": There are certain financial interests and, possibly, incentives associated with GNSO actions that affect Internet domain name policies. As they pertain to GNSO Council voting actions, such interests are expected to be documented in a Councilor's required Statement of Interest (see Chapter 5.0) and do not require that the Councilor abstain from participating and voting. GNSO Councilors do not have a fiduciary responsibility to act in the best interests of ICANN in discharging their responsibilities on the Council. GNSO Operating Procedures, Version 2.5 Page 15 While the deliberations and decisions of ICANN are made in the interests of the global Internet community as a whole, GNSO Councilors are understood, in some cases, to represent the views of organizations and interest groups that would materially benefit from policies recommended by the GNSO. It is understood that Councilors are often employed by or represent those affected parties and such relationships could engender subsequent benefit to Councilors as individuals. As a result of these special circumstances and to avoid confusion with ICANN's Conflict of Interest Policy, which does not pertain to GNSO Council matters, the term "Conflict of Interest" will not pertain when a GNSO Councilor argues for and votes "Yes" or "No" on a matter which, by virtue of that action, directly or indirectly benefits that individual financially or economically; however, that interpretation does not imply that circumstances cannot occur in which a Councilor may perceive his/her situation as obligating a formal abstention. From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: 17 December 2012 23:25 To: john@crediblecontext.com Cc: council@gnso.icann.org List; Mason Cole Subject: Re: [council] Conflicts and the Draft reply to Fadi John, Thank you for your question with respect to conflicts of interest. Here is some information that may be helpful. The GNSO Council Operating Procedures (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/gnso-operating-procedures-13sep12-en.pdf) differentiate between "conflicts of interest" and "statements of interest." The Procedures contain requirements relating to Statements of interest in Section 5.0. These are defined as, "A written statement made by a Relevant Party that provides a declaration of interests that may affect the Relevant Party's judgement, on any matters to be considered by the GNSO Group. " These statements of interest are to be provided by any member of a GNSO Group (such as the Council, but also Working Groups) to the Secretariat not less frequently than once a year and at the beginning of a GNSO Group meeting the Chair asks if members have updates to their statements of interest. Below I've included the questions that form the content of the statement of interest. The Procedures also reference "conflicts of interest," but only in the context of a disclaimer (see excerpt from Section 4.5, Obligational Abstentions, below) that refers to the Statements of Interest procedures and notes that these statements do not require that the Councilor abstain from participating and voting. In particular, section 4.5 notes as follows: ".the term "Conflict of Interest" will not pertain when a GNSO Councilor argues for and votes "Yes" or "No" on a matter which, by virtue of that action, directly or indirectly benefits that individual financially or economically; however, that interpretation does not imply that circumstances cannot occur in which a Councilor may perceive his/her situation as obligating a formal abstention." With respect to abstentions, the "Obligational Abstention" (see details below) perhaps addresses what you refer to as "conflict of interest." That is, it allows a Councilor to abstain from a vote as follows and provides cases as examples (see below): "A Councilor who believes that proceeding to vote on a motion or action before the Council not only warrants, but requires, his/her abstention and, thereby, recusal from deliberations, is considered to be facing an obligational abstention." I hope that this is helpful, but please let me know if you need more information or have more questions. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Excerpted from GNSO Council Operating Procedures, Section 5.3.3, page 21 5.3.3 Content Relevant Parties shall complete all six sections of the Statement of Interest form as specified below: 1. Please identify your current employer(s) and position(s). 2. Please identify your declared country of primary residence (which may be the country to which you pay taxes). 3. Please identify the type(s) of work performed at #1 above. 4. Please list any financial relationship beyond de minimus stock ownership you may have with any company that to your knowledge has a financial relationship or contract with ICANN. 5. Do you believe you are participating in the GNSO policy process as a representative of any individual or entity,whether paid or unpaid? Please answer "yes" or "no." If the answer is "yes," please provide the name of the represented individual or entity. If professional ethical obligations prevent you from disclosing this information, please so state. 6. Please identify any other relevant arrangements, interests, or benefits as requested in the following two questions: i. Do you have any type of material interest in ICANN GNSO policy development processes and outcomes? Please answer "yes" or "no." If the answer is "yes," please describe the material interest in ICANN GNSO policy development processes and outcomes. ii. Are there any arrangements/agreements between you and any other group, constituency or person(s) regarding your participation as a work team member? Please answer "yes" or "no." If the answer is "yes," please describe the arrangements/agreements and the name of the group, constituency, or person(s). Excerpted from GNSO Council Operating Procedures, Section 4.5, Abstentions, page 15 a. Obligational Abstentions This category of abstentions results from conditions in which a Councilor may find that he/she is unable to vote on a measure due to a competing personal (e.g. religious), professional, or political interest that interferes with his/her ability to participate in the matter or where participation raises ethical questions. Disclaimer concerning the term "Conflict of Interest": There are certain financial interests and, possibly, incentives associated with GNSO actions that affect Internet domain name policies. As they pertain to GNSO Council voting actions, such interests are expected to be documented in a Councilor's required Statement of Interest (see Chapter 5.0 <applewebdata://C6470B06-97BB-49EC-9D50-8234F30229D9#_Chapter_5.0:_Statement s_2> ) and do not require that the Councilor abstain from participating and voting. GNSO Councilors do not have a fiduciary responsibility to act in the best interests of ICANN in discharging their responsibilities on the Council. While the deliberations and decisions of ICANN are made in the interests of the global Internet community as a whole, GNSO Councilors are understood, in some cases, to represent the views of organizations and interest groups that would materially benefit from policies recommended by the GNSO. It is understood that Councilors are often employed by or represent those affected parties and such relationships could engender subsequent benefit to Councilors as individuals. As a result of these special circumstances and to avoid confusion with ICANN's Conflict of Interest Policy, which does not pertain to GNSO Council matters, the term "Conflict of Interest" will not pertain when a GNSO Councilor argues for and votes "Yes" or "No" on a matter which, by virtue of that action, directly or indirectly benefits that individual financially or economically; however, that interpretation does not imply that circumstances cannot occur in which a Councilor may perceive his/her situation as obligating a formal abstention. A Councilor who believes that proceeding to vote on a motion or action before the Council not only warrants, but requires, his/her abstention and,thereby, recusal from deliberations, is considered to be facing an obligational abstention. Although it is not possible to draft a set of exhaustive conditions under which obligational abstentions can arise, two examples are provided by way of illustration: Case 1: a Councilor (attorney by profession) is representing a client in legal actionrelating to a matter before the Council and, and as required by his/her professional code, must abstain and, furthermore, such abstention should not be counted as a negative vote. [Note: this type of situation requires the remedy specified in Paragraph 4.5.3 <applewebdata://C6470B06-97BB-49EC-9D50-8234F30229D9#_4.5.3_Remedy_To_1> below]. Case 2: a Councilor is a paid consultant for a national political body that has a vested interest in a particular motion before the Council. The Councilor is concerned that his/her future income potential and ability to retain a consulting engagement with the national body may be affected if he/she votes on the measure. In such a case, the Councilor believes that the ethical course of action is to abstain. In the two examples above, personal or professional obligations interfere with the Council member's ability to participate ethically; thus, requiring recusal from deliberations on the matter and abstention from voting. From: "john@crediblecontext.com" <john@crediblecontext.com> Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 12:00 PM To: Mason Cole <mcole@5x5com.com>, "council@gnso.icann.org List" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] Conflicts and the Draft reply to Fadi Jonathan, et. al., Before I offer comment on Mason's draft and before we convene on Thursday can I get some guidance on how those of us who have a conflict on the matter of new gTLDs should conduct ourselves or offer input? Cheers, John Berard Founder Credible Context 58 West Portal Avenue, #291 San Francisco, CA 94127 m: 415.845.4388 -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [council] Draft reply to Fadi From: Mason Cole <mcole@5x5com.com> Date: Fri, December 14, 2012 11:11 am To: "council@gnso.icann.org List" <council@gnso.icann.org> Council colleagues -- I have taken the liberty of drafting a reply to Fadi's request for Council advice on the BC/IPC request for more RPMs. Jonathan and I have spoken about a process from here and I am happy to keep the pen for possible suggestions and edits. Speaking for myself, though I realize the holidays are fast approaching I would hope we can get a communication to Fadi expeditiously. Many thanks -- Mason