Dear all, While I was on the recent call when this matter was discussed, what was not present at the time was the knowledge that significant changes (to the SCI Charter with GNSO Council approval) would have to occur. Therefore, I would like to withdraw my verbal support on the call for changes to 'Raising an Issue'. By way of this mail, I am placing my support behind #1 below, i.e. Maintain the status quo. Kind regards, RA Ronald N. Andruff RNA Partners, Inc. _____ From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 6:32 AM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] For your review - raising an issue options Dear All, In relation to the agenda item 'Raising an issue - Has this been sufficiently clarified', three possible approaches were identified during the last meeting: 1. Maintain status quo - which means only the GNSO Council or a group chartered by the GNSO Council can request an item to be reviewed by the SCI. Possibly consider communicating to other SO/ACs / individuals, that if there are issues they would like to see reviewed by the SCI, that they will need to channel these via the GNSO Council and/or a group chartered by the GNSO Council. 2. Add the possibility for other ICANN SO/ACs to make a direct request to the SCI - this would require a change to the SCI Charter and would need GNSO Council approval. 3. Add the possibility for any chartered group to make a direct request to the SCI - this would require a change to the SCI Charter and would need GNSO Council approval. Some also noted that a definition of 'chartered' would be needed as it is not clear whether SO/ACs are chartered. Members are encouraged to share their views on these three options and/or identify any other options that should be considered to address this issue ahead of the next meeting. With best regards, Marika