ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[council]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[council] Re: Milton's motion


Dear Council members,

Milton has introduced the following motion to the Council:

Motion:The provision in the UDRP Review Terms of Reference excluding from
participation members of the "small drafting committee" that worked on the
original UDRP is rescinded.

I also note that the Council Chair has stated:  "The rules in our rules of
procedures are guidelines. If we choose, as the NC, we can change them at any
time and agree to an exception."

After certain constituencies and the General Assembly have already put forth
their appointed or elected representatives, is it prudent at this point to
now add additional potential candidates?  Would you have us revoke the
elections already held so that new candidates may be added for consideration?
  Please remember that the General Assembly can no longer hold elections as
the Secretariat does not have the human resources to provide this service at
this time.

If the members of this small drafting committee are essential to the work of
the Task Force, perhaps the TF might convene a Working Group which would
include these members as well as the many others that want to contribute to
the consensus process.

A final question...   While I understand that your terms of reference state
that, "However, to the extent no consensus can be reasonably reached on an
item, majority vote shall rule with all dissenting views being made of
record."   Who on this Task Force will be "voting"?   Based on the
composition of this TF, it is entirely possible for a majority vote to be
cast by individuals that are not even members of the DNSO.  







<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>