Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the GNSO Bylaws Implementation Drafting Team- call held on Thursday, 15 September 2016 at 19:00 UTC at: https://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-bylaws-implementation-15sep16-en.mp3 The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Farzaneh Badii Steve Metalitz Darcy Southwell David Maher Edward Morris Steve DelBianco Matthew Shears Apologies: Amr Elsadr ICANN staff: Julie Hedlund Michelle DeSmyter ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archive:http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-bylaws-dt/ DT wikispace: https://community.icann.org/x/dh2sAw Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle Adobe Chat Transcript for Thursday 15 September 2016 Michelle DeSmyter:Dear all, Welcome to the GNSO Bylaws Implementation Drafting Team on Thursday, 15 September 2016 at 19:00 UTC. Michelle DeSmyter:Wiki Agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/dh2sAw Steve DelBianco:notes from our last meeting are at https://community.icann.org/display/GBIDT/07-09-2016+GNSO+Bylaws+Implementat... steve metalitz:Steve was an excellent witness att he hearing. Congratulations. Edward Morris:Agreed. I was very happy to see Senator Cruz fall into a trap sprung by the magic Stress Test 18. Excellent work by Steve. Edward Morris:Completely agreeStee. Your information matches that I've received today from contacts i DC. Julie Hedlund:@Steve D. The deadline is in a Council motion, so it still stands unless the Council passes a motion to the contrary. matthew shears:thats good to hear Steve matthew shears:I think we have to move ahead with the focus on Council Edward Morris:Exactly Steve matthew shears:My prefernce is for as little change as possible - if we can port decision-making as it stands that is preferable. We need to have a discussions about whether it is appropriate and proportionate to change Steve DelBianco:Could staff please put 22.7 on the screen? matthew shears:decicional participants are the sos and acs Julie Hedlund:@Steve D: I'll get it up. matthew shears:I think that's right Steve Julie Hedlund:Sorry all, having trouble identifying it to bring up. Darcy Southwell:6.1(a) of the new bylaws? matthew shears:can we start by addressing the issues where the EC and Decisional particpants are clear - and then address those where they are not matthew shears:its a specific "exception" for that particular item I would argue matthew shears:+ 1 Steve matthew shears:we need to focus on the rule first and then the exceptions Steve DelBianco:Julie -- coudl you put up the table I sent you? Julie Hedlund:Sorry for the delay Steve. I lost connectivity. steve metalitz:In order not to further prolong this discussion I will just note here the two other provisions I identified that might fall within the third category (yes/no decisions not necessarily within Empowered Community) : 17.3(b): determining method of review of effectiveness of CSC ; 4.3(b): GNSO as claimant in reconsideration/IRP. Julie Hedlund:All -- the document is unsynced. matthew shears:appreciate the table - Steve - its helpful Steve DelBianco:Ed is right -- Council resolution for our reccomendations requires GNSO Supermajority matthew shears:they would not be there if they did not feel that they had a representative role I susopect Steve DelBianco:Question: does any other SO have votint Nom Com reps? matthew shears:We can't judge their accountability in isolation of their role - I suspoect that they would argue they are accountabile in some form or another Farzaneh Badii:I agree Matt Steve DelBianco:@Farzi -- guess we better add Nom Com voting reps to our SOAC Accountability discussions in WS2 matthew shears:disagree that directed = accountability Steve DelBianco:The Bylaws decribe it as "default threshhold" on page 68 of bylaws steve metalitz:@Darcy you mean new SG's or C's, correct? steve metalitz:@Ed I did not say you supported my proposal, and apologize if I implied that. Farzaneh Badii:Was this table sent to the list? Julie Hedlund:@Farzi: Not yet, but I will send it after this call. Farzaneh Badii:Thanks Julie matthew shears:I don't think we should be trying to solve the problem of confused councillors - isn't that out of scope Farzaneh Badii:Steve came up with the tests, based on different scenarios? Steve DelBianco:@Farzi -- yes, I just imagined some scenarios where a good majority of council might NOT prevail if we required majoirty of each house Farzaneh Badii:thanks Steve Julie Hedlund:@Steve D: Invented just last year. Steve DelBianco:(xvi) Initiation of a GNSO Guidance Process ("GGP"): requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.(xvii) Rejection of Initiation of a GGP Requested by the Board: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.(xviii) ApprovalofGGPRecommendations:requiresanaffirmativevoteof a GNSO Supermajority. Julie Hedlund:@Steve: Correct that it has not yet been used. matthew shears:Steve - the timeline is a massive bind - we almost don't have time to address options other than default - unless we can identify a minimal number of expcetions and work on those matthew shears:agree with the approach steve Julie Hedlund:0900-1030 next Wednesday Julie Hedlund:21 September matthew shears:can't we do thursdays this time? Farzaneh Badii:I think the tests on the table should be explained Steve . matthew shears:agree matthew shears:ah Farzaneh Badii:good. an explenation :) Farzaneh Badii:Thanks Steve. Farzaneh Badii:bye matthew shears:thanks