Ute, Here is the wording of the resolution by the Board: "Resolved (2008.02.15.03), the ICANN Board directs staff to open a public comment forum for 30 days on the GNSO Improvements Report, draft a detailed implementation plan in consultation with the GNSO, begin implementation of the non-contentious recommendations, and return to the Board and community for further consideration of the implementation plan. " It doesn't seem like your proposed change is terribly significant to me, but I don't understand why you would want to delete something that was in the passed resolution. Maybe what we should do is quote the resolution (as copied above) in its entirety. Chuck ________________________________ From: Ute Decker [mailto:udecker@microsoft.com] Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 12:51 PM To: Gomes, Chuck; Avri Doria; Council GNSO Subject: RE: [council] Proposed Motion for 25 June on GNSO "Improvments" Avri, Chuck, While this motion is still up in the air (apologies if I have missed a consolidated version) let me suggest a further change. I propose to leave out the first phrase and start directly with: 'Whereas the Board resolution directed ICANN staff..'. That would make it (editing your initial text - without prejudice to also including further changes you propose below): Whereas Board resolution 2008.02.15.03 directed the ICANN Staff in consultation > with GNSO to develop an implementation plan > > And whereas such a plan was developed by the Planning Team composed of > staff and GNSO members working jointly and in cooperation, > > Therefore: > > The GSNO Council approves the Framework defined in GNSO Improvements - > Top Level Plan of 21 June 2008 prepared by the GNSO Improvements > Planning Team as documented in (url) and request that constituencies > and nomcom appointees begin the task of naming representatives to > serve in the two Standing Committees as defined in the Top Level Plan. > The reason for this proposed change is that a 'whereas' of course states the basis for a motion, i.e. something that is done and established. I see no merit in stating an expectation as the basis for a motion and would feel more comfortable supporting the motion in this shorter version. Best wishes Ute From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: 22 June 2008 07:09 To: Avri Doria; Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Proposed Motion for 25 June on GNSO "Improvments" You are correct Avri but some may remember the goal in the plan. Your call. Chuck Sent from my GoodLink Wireless Handheld (www.good.com) -----Original Message----- From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri@psg.com] Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2008 02:03 AM Eastern Standard Time To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Proposed Motion for 25 June on GNSO "Improvments" Hi Chuck, I have no problem adding 'by 27 June' to the end of the last sentence as this is the date indicated in the plan, though I thought the last sentence had already covered it by stating. "... request(s) that constituencies and nomcom appointees begin the task of naming representatives to serve in the two Standing Committees as defined in the Top Level Plan. Or are you suggesting anther change I am not understanding? thanks a. On 22 Jun 2008, at 07:41, Gomes, Chuck wrote: > Avri, > > It looks good to me except it might be helpful to request that > constituencies identify one member each foe each of the two steering > committees by the Council meeting on 25 June if possible. > > Chuck > > > Sent from my GoodLink Wireless Handheld (www.good.com) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri@psg.com] > Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2008 05:27 PM Eastern Standard Time > To: Council GNSO > Subject: [council] Proposed Motion for 25 June on GNSO > "Improvments" > > > Hi > > Based on my understanding of the results of today's meeting, I have > drafted the following motion. > > thanks > > a. > > > Motion: Avri Doria > Second: > > > Whereas it is expected that ICANN Board of Directors will adopt > recommendations for GNSO "Improvements" and in response to Board > resolution 2008.02.15.03 that directed the ICANN Staff in consultation > with GNSO to develop an implementation plan > > And whereas such a plan was developed by the Planning Team composed of > staff and GNSO members working jointly and in cooperation, > > Therefore: > > The GSNO Council approves the Framework defined in GNSO Improvements - > Top Level Plan of 21 June 2008 prepared by the GNSO Improvements > Planning Team as documented in (url) and request that constituencies > and nomcom appointees begin the task of naming representatives to > serve in the two Standing Committees as defined in the Top Level Plan. > > > >

Makes sense to me. Chuck ________________________________ From: Ute Decker [mailto:udecker@microsoft.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 5:02 AM To: Gomes, Chuck; Avri Doria; Council GNSO Subject: RE: [council] Proposed Motion for 25 June on GNSO "Improvments" Chuck, Thank you, this is helpful. I think we are in agreement that we want to base the motion on the Board resolution - so drop the introductory 'Whereas it is expected that ICANN Board of Directors will adopt recommendations for GNSO "Improvements' and go straight to the Board resolution, - quoting the relevant section. From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com] Sent: 24 June 2008 04:50 To: Ute Decker; Avri Doria; Council GNSO Subject: RE: [council] Proposed Motion for 25 June on GNSO "Improvments" Ute, Here is the wording of the resolution by the Board: "Resolved (2008.02.15.03), the ICANN Board directs staff to open a public comment forum for 30 days on the GNSO Improvements Report, draft a detailed implementation plan in consultation with the GNSO, begin implementation of the non-contentious recommendations, and return to the Board and community for further consideration of the implementation plan. " It doesn't seem like your proposed change is terribly significant to me, but I don't understand why you would want to delete something that was in the passed resolution. Maybe what we should do is quote the resolution (as copied above) in its entirety. Chuck ________________________________ From: Ute Decker [mailto:udecker@microsoft.com] Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 12:51 PM To: Gomes, Chuck; Avri Doria; Council GNSO Subject: RE: [council] Proposed Motion for 25 June on GNSO "Improvments" Avri, Chuck, While this motion is still up in the air (apologies if I have missed a consolidated version) let me suggest a further change. I propose to leave out the first phrase and start directly with: 'Whereas the Board resolution directed ICANN staff..'. That would make it (editing your initial text - without prejudice to also including further changes you propose below): Whereas Board resolution 2008.02.15.03 directed the ICANN Staff in consultation > with GNSO to develop an implementation plan > > And whereas such a plan was developed by the Planning Team composed of > staff and GNSO members working jointly and in cooperation, > > Therefore: > > The GSNO Council approves the Framework defined in GNSO Improvements - > Top Level Plan of 21 June 2008 prepared by the GNSO Improvements > Planning Team as documented in (url) and request that constituencies > and nomcom appointees begin the task of naming representatives to > serve in the two Standing Committees as defined in the Top Level Plan. > The reason for this proposed change is that a 'whereas' of course states the basis for a motion, i.e. something that is done and established. I see no merit in stating an expectation as the basis for a motion and would feel more comfortable supporting the motion in this shorter version. Best wishes Ute From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: 22 June 2008 07:09 To: Avri Doria; Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Proposed Motion for 25 June on GNSO "Improvments" You are correct Avri but some may remember the goal in the plan. Your call. Chuck Sent from my GoodLink Wireless Handheld (www.good.com) -----Original Message----- From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri@psg.com] Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2008 02:03 AM Eastern Standard Time To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Proposed Motion for 25 June on GNSO "Improvments" Hi Chuck, I have no problem adding 'by 27 June' to the end of the last sentence as this is the date indicated in the plan, though I thought the last sentence had already covered it by stating. "... request(s) that constituencies and nomcom appointees begin the task of naming representatives to serve in the two Standing Committees as defined in the Top Level Plan. Or are you suggesting anther change I am not understanding? thanks a. On 22 Jun 2008, at 07:41, Gomes, Chuck wrote: > Avri, > > It looks good to me except it might be helpful to request that > constituencies identify one member each foe each of the two steering > committees by the Council meeting on 25 June if possible. > > Chuck > > > Sent from my GoodLink Wireless Handheld (www.good.com) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri@psg.com] > Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2008 05:27 PM Eastern Standard Time > To: Council GNSO > Subject: [council] Proposed Motion for 25 June on GNSO > "Improvments" > > > Hi > > Based on my understanding of the results of today's meeting, I have > drafted the following motion. > > thanks > > a. > > > Motion: Avri Doria > Second: > > > Whereas it is expected that ICANN Board of Directors will adopt > recommendations for GNSO "Improvements" and in response to Board > resolution 2008.02.15.03 that directed the ICANN Staff in consultation > with GNSO to develop an implementation plan > > And whereas such a plan was developed by the Planning Team composed of > staff and GNSO members working jointly and in cooperation, > > Therefore: > > The GSNO Council approves the Framework defined in GNSO Improvements - > Top Level Plan of 21 June 2008 prepared by the GNSO Improvements > Planning Team as documented in (url) and request that constituencies > and nomcom appointees begin the task of naming representatives to > serve in the two Standing Committees as defined in the Top Level Plan. > > > >