[At-Large] [ALAC-Internal] Report to the ICANN Board of Directors from WG on GNSO Council Restructuring

Tue Jul 29 12:47:01 EDT 2008

If I had to make the decision, I would have to endorse the Avri Doria's
statement. The bicameral council idea is some neat footworks but I cannot
find anywhere reference to a "conference committee" that would be necessary
to "iron out" differences that would (shall?) emerge from both houses in
order to report a "consensus" position to the ICANN Board. So the complexity
imposed doesn't appear to get you further along the path to consensus in a
shorter time!

A question as to rationale. As I understand it, a call for an Issues Report
is the pre-requisite to the PDP. Why then would (or should?) the voting
threshold requirements be different?

The statements of the Registry & NCUC representatives certainly peaked my
interest. They seem more about personal animus than not.

Carlton 

-----Original Message-----
From: alac-internal-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
[mailto:alac-internal-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Cheryl
Langdon-Orr
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 12:06 AM
To: alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org
Cc: 'ALAC internal list'
Subject: [ALAC-Internal] Report to the ICANN Board of Directors from WG on
GNSO Council Restructuring

At-Large.  please note that earlier today the ALAC Executive and our
representative on this WG Alan Greenberg, met and discussed our desire to
have a formal ALAC Statement to the Board on this matter.

Please see our Wiki page
https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?at_large_advisory_committee  to find a
link to the report of the WG  from this now completed process, and also
under Announcements to find an short background piece from the report and  a
note as to the mechanism for the ALAC to review our sub-committee and Rep
statement appended to it, to be endorsed (in an expanded form if so desired)
as an ALAC Statement to the Board.

ALAC  this serves as the start of the 7 day  minimum notice required for a
formal vote to be taken (between meetings) on this matter and in the next
24hrs further background documents and proposed expansion of this statement
will be posted and a Big Pulse vote be created for the purpose of recording
your views to 1. Endorse the proposed document an ALAC Statement, 2. Vote
against the proposal or 3. Abstain.