Dear All, In relation to item 4 on the SCI agenda (deferral of motions), please see below and attached the information gathered by the GNSO Secretariat on the practice of deferrals since the beginning of the bi-cameral Council (October 2009). With best regards, Marika From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@icann.org<mailto:Glen@icann.org>> To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> Cc: Liz Gasster <liz.gasster@icann.org<mailto:liz.gasster@icann.org>>, "gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>" <gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>> Subject: Motion deferrals Dear Marika, Please find the list of meeting deferrals attached. (We tried a number of formats and decided that this was the clearest display) The deferrals start from the beginning of the Bi-cameral Council in Seoul, 28 October 2009. 22 deferrals in two (2) years in (7) seven months. 4 motions were deferred a second time 1 motion was deferred a third time Type of motions: 2 Administrative 1 Approve Interim report 3 Approve Issues Report 3 Approve Final Reports 2 Approve Draft Charter 1 Approve Working Group Principles 4 Extending Timelines 1 Initiate Policy Development process (PDP) 1 Response to board Resolution 1 Request to change to Module 2 of the Draft Applicant Guidebook 2 WHOIS Studies We have noted the trend which was started but not carried on, proposing a motion for discussion before the motion is officially proposed for a Council vote. 09 June 2011: Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Part B Working Group Type of motion: presented for discussion only on the Adoption of the IRTP Part B Final Report and Recommendations Please let me know if you need more information and if you want it in some tabular form. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org
Hi, Thanks for this. Is the number of total motions out of which the 22 deferrals occurred known? And in terms of the breakdown, if known that would help. Knowing the percentages of total is always useful in scoping the extent of a behavior I would also be interested in the rate of growth. Have deferrals become more frequent, and at rate did the become more frequent. Also, it would be good to have an idea on whether there was a rate difference between the various constituencies. thanks avri On 19 Apr 2012, at 03:55, Marika Konings wrote:
Dear All,
In relation to item 4 on the SCI agenda (deferral of motions), please see below and attached the information gathered by the GNSO Secretariat on the practice of deferrals since the beginning of the bi-cameral Council (October 2009).
With best regards,
Marika
From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@icann.org> To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Liz Gasster <liz.gasster@icann.org>, "gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Motion deferrals
Dear Marika,
Please find the list of meeting deferrals attached. (We tried a number of formats and decided that this was the clearest display) The deferrals start from the beginning of the Bi-cameral Council in Seoul, 28 October 2009.
22 deferrals in two (2) years in (7) seven months. 4 motions were deferred a second time 1 motion was deferred a third time
Type of motions:
2 Administrative 1 Approve Interim report 3 Approve Issues Report 3 Approve Final Reports 2 Approve Draft Charter 1 Approve Working Group Principles 4 Extending Timelines 1 Initiate Policy Development process (PDP) 1 Response to board Resolution 1 Request to change to Module 2 of the Draft Applicant Guidebook 2 WHOIS Studies
We have noted the trend which was started but not carried on, proposing a motion for discussion before the motion is officially proposed for a Council vote. 09 June 2011: Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Part B Working Group
Type of motion: presented for discussion only on the Adoption of the IRTP Part B Final Report and Recommendations
Please let me know if you need more information and if you want it in some tabular form. Thank you. Kind regards,
Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org
<Motion Deferrals v1.doc>
Avri, I will try and have some of these answers before the meeting. Thanks, Glen -----Message d'origine----- De : owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org] De la part de Avri Doria Envoyé : jeudi 19 avril 2012 18:42 À : gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org Objet : Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Motion deferrals Hi, Thanks for this. Is the number of total motions out of which the 22 deferrals occurred known? And in terms of the breakdown, if known that would help. Knowing the percentages of total is always useful in scoping the extent of a behavior I would also be interested in the rate of growth. Have deferrals become more frequent, and at rate did the become more frequent. Also, it would be good to have an idea on whether there was a rate difference between the various constituencies. thanks avri On 19 Apr 2012, at 03:55, Marika Konings wrote:
Dear All,
In relation to item 4 on the SCI agenda (deferral of motions), please see below and attached the information gathered by the GNSO Secretariat on the practice of deferrals since the beginning of the bi-cameral Council (October 2009).
With best regards,
Marika
From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@icann.org> To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Liz Gasster <liz.gasster@icann.org>, "gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Motion deferrals
Dear Marika,
Please find the list of meeting deferrals attached. (We tried a number of formats and decided that this was the clearest display) The deferrals start from the beginning of the Bi-cameral Council in Seoul, 28 October 2009.
22 deferrals in two (2) years in (7) seven months. 4 motions were deferred a second time 1 motion was deferred a third time
Type of motions:
2 Administrative 1 Approve Interim report 3 Approve Issues Report 3 Approve Final Reports 2 Approve Draft Charter 1 Approve Working Group Principles 4 Extending Timelines 1 Initiate Policy Development process (PDP) 1 Response to board Resolution 1 Request to change to Module 2 of the Draft Applicant Guidebook 2 WHOIS Studies
We have noted the trend which was started but not carried on, proposing a motion for discussion before the motion is officially proposed for a Council vote. 09 June 2011: Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Part B Working Group
Type of motion: presented for discussion only on the Adoption of the IRTP Part B Final Report and Recommendations
Please let me know if you need more information and if you want it in some tabular form. Thank you. Kind regards,
Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org
<Motion Deferrals v1.doc>
For today's meeting: How are consent items handled? A consent agenda can only work if the reports, and other matters for the meeting agenda are known in advance and distributed with agenda package in sufficient time to be read by all members prior to the meeting. A typical procedure is as follows: 1. When preparing the meeting agenda, the president or chairperson determines whether an item belongs on the consent agenda. 2. The president prepares a numbered list of the consent items as part of, or as an attachment to the meeting agenda. 3. The list and supporting documents are included in the board’s agenda package in sufficient time to be read by all members prior to the meeting. 4. At the beginning of the meeting, the chair asks members what items they wish to be removed from the consent agenda and discussed individually. 5. If any member requests that an item be removed from the consent agenda, it must be removed. Members may request that an item be removed for any reason. They may wish, for example, to discuss the item, to query the item, or to register a vote against the item. 6. Once it has been removed, the chair can decide whether to take up the matter immediately or place it on the regular meeting agenda. 7. When there are no more items to be removed, the chair or secretary reads out the numbers of the remaining consent items. Then the chair states: “If there is no objection, these items will be adopted.” After pausing for any objections, the chair states “As there are no objections, these items are adopted.” It is not necessary to ask for a show of hands. 8. When preparing the minutes, the Secretary includes the full text of the resolutions, reports or recommendations that were adopted as part of the consent agenda. How to start using a consent agenda In order to start using a consent agenda, the board should first adopt a rule of order allowing for the consent agenda process. Parliamentarian Colette Collier Trohan CPP-T, PRP www.cctrohan.com suggests the following rule: “A consent agenda may be presented by the president at the beginning of a meeting. Items may be removed from the consent agenda on the request of any one member. Items not removed may be adopted by general consent without debate. Removed items may be taken up either immediately after the consent agenda or placed later on the agenda at the discretion of the assembly. It is important to make sure that all directors know what items belong on the agenda and how to move items to and from the consent agenda. For this reason, instruction on using the consent agenda should be part of the board orientation program. j. scott evans - senior legal director, head of global brand, domains & copyright - Yahoo! Inc. - 408.349.1385 - jscottevans@yahoo.com ________________________________ From: Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 9:41 AM Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Motion deferrals Hi, Thanks for this. Is the number of total motions out of which the 22 deferrals occurred known? And in terms of the breakdown, if known that would help. Knowing the percentages of total is always useful in scoping the extent of a behavior I would also be interested in the rate of growth. Have deferrals become more frequent, and at rate did the become more frequent. Also, it would be good to have an idea on whether there was a rate difference between the various constituencies. thanks avri On 19 Apr 2012, at 03:55, Marika Konings wrote:
Dear All,
In relation to item 4 on the SCI agenda (deferral of motions), please see below and attached the information gathered by the GNSO Secretariat on the practice of deferrals since the beginning of the bi-cameral Council (October 2009).
With best regards,
Marika
From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@icann.org> To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Liz Gasster <liz.gasster@icann.org>, "gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Motion deferrals
Dear Marika, Please find the list of meeting deferrals attached. (We tried a number of formats and decided that this was the clearest display) The deferrals start from the beginning of the Bi-cameral Council in Seoul, 28 October 2009. 22 deferrals in two (2) years in (7) seven months. 4 motions were deferred a second time 1 motion was deferred a third time Type of motions:
2 Administrative 1 Approve Interim report 3 Approve Issues Report 3 Approve Final Reports 2 Approve Draft Charter 1 Approve Working Group Principles 4 Extending Timelines 1 Initiate Policy Development process (PDP) 1 Response to board Resolution 1 Request to change to Module 2 of the Draft Applicant Guidebook 2 WHOIS Studies
We have noted the trend which was started but not carried on, proposing a motion for discussion before the motion is officially proposed for a Council vote. 09 June 2011: Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Part B Working Group
Type of motion: presented for discussion only on the Adoption of the IRTP Part B Final Report and Recommendations
Please let me know if you need more information and if you want it in some tabular form. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org <Motion Deferrals v1.doc>
Everyone, please accept my apologies for missing today's meeting (I am hosting a federal judge at my law school today). I look forward to catching up on what I missed, and hope to contribute to subsequent discussion of these agenda items. Cheers Mary Mary W S Wong Professor of Law Chair, Graduate IP Programs Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAWTwo White StreetConcord, NH 03301USAEmail: mary.wong@law.unh.eduPhone: 1-603-513-5143Webpage: http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.phpSelected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584>>> From: "J. Scott Evans" <jscottevans@yahoo.com> To:Avri Doria <avri@acm.org>, "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org> Date: 4/19/2012 3:01 PM Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Motion deferrals For today's meeting: How are consent items handled? A consent agenda can only work if the reports, and other matters for the meeting agenda are known in advance and distributed with agenda package in sufficient time to be read by all members prior to the meeting. A typical procedure is as follows: When preparing the meeting agenda, the president or chairperson determines whether an item belongs on the consent agenda. The president prepares a numbered list of the consent items as part of, or as an attachment to the meeting agenda. The list and supporting documents are included in the board’s agenda package in sufficient time to be read by all members prior to the meeting. At the beginning of the meeting, the chair asks members what items they wish to be removed from the consent agenda and discussed individually. If any member requests that an item be removed from the consent agenda, it must be removed. Members may request that an item be removed for any reason. They may wish, for example, to discuss the item, to query the item, or to register a vote against the item. Once it has been removed, the chair can decide whether to take up the matter immediately or place it on the regular meeting agenda. When there are no more items to be removed, the chair or secretary reads out the numbers of the remaining consent items. Then the chair states: “If there is no objection, these items will be adopted.” After pausing for any objections, the chair states “As there are no objections, these items are adopted.” It is not necessary to ask for a show of hands. When preparing the minutes, the Secretary includes the full text of the resolutions, reports or recommendations that were adopted as part of the consent agenda. How to start using a consent agenda In order to start using a consent agenda, the board should first adopt a rule of order allowing for the consent agenda process. Parliamentarian Colette Collier Trohan CPP-T, PRP www.cctrohan.com suggests the following rule: “A consent agenda may be presented by the president at the beginning of a meeting. Items may be removed from the consent agenda on the request of any one member. Items not removed may be adopted by general consent without debate. Removed items may be taken up either immediately after the consent agenda or placed later on the agenda at the discretion of the assembly. It is important to make sure that all directors know what items belong on the agenda and how to move items to and from the consent agenda. For this reason, instruction on using the consent agenda should be part of the board orientation program. j. scott evans - senior legal director, head of global brand, domains & copyright - Yahoo! Inc. - 408.349.1385 - jscottevans@yahoo.com From: Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 9:41 AM Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Motion deferrals Hi, Thanks for this. Is the number of total motions out of which the 22 deferrals occurred known? And in terms of the breakdown, if known that would help. Knowing the percentages of total is always useful in scoping the extent of a behavior I would also be interested in the rate of growth. Have deferrals become more frequent, and at rate did the become more frequent. Also, it would be good to have an idea on whether there was a rate difference between the various constituencies. thanks avri On 19 Apr 2012, at 03:55, Marika Konings wrote:
Dear All,
In relation to item 4 on the SCI agenda (deferral of motions), please see below and attached the information gathered by the GNSO Secretariat on the practice of deferrals since the beginning of the bi-cameral Council (October 2009).
With best regards,
Marika
From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@icann.org> To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Liz Gasster <liz.gasster@icann.org>, "gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Motion deferrals
Dear Marika,
Please find the list of meeting deferrals attached. (We tried a number of formats and decided that this was the clearest display) The deferrals start from the beginning of the Bi-cameral Council in Seoul, 28 October 2009.
22 deferrals in two (2) years in (7) seven months. 4 motions were deferred a second time 1 motion was deferred a third time
Type of motions:
2 Administrative 1 Approve Interim report 3 Approve Issues Report 3 Approve Final Reports 2 Approve Draft Charter 1 Approve Working Group Principles 4 Extending Timelines 1 Initiate Policy Development process (PDP) 1 Response to board Resolution 1 Request to change to Module 2 of the Draft Applicant Guidebook 2 WHOIS Studies
We have noted the trend which was started but not carried on, proposing a motion for discussion before the motion is officially proposed for a Council vote. 09 June 2011: Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Part B Working Group
Type of motion: presented for discussion only on the Adoption of the IRTP Part B Final Report and Recommendations
Please let me know if you need more information and if you want it in some tabular form. Thank you. Kind regards,
Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org
<Motion Deferrals v1.doc>
participants (5)
-
Avri Doria -
Glen de Saint Géry -
J. Scott Evans -
Marika Konings -
Mary.Wong＠law.unh.edu