Names Council Intake Committee
Report on the objectives of the Intake Committee and rules
relevant to meetings of the Names Council agenda August 2000
version 1
Participants of the Names Council (NC) intake committee (IC):
Philip Sheppard - chair
Caroline Chicoine
Paul Kane
Chuck Gomes
Michael Schneider
Y J Park
Roberto Gaetano (GA chair)
Destination: this report is intended for discussion and
adoption at the NC meeting 17 August 2000.
Implementation: the recommendations in this report are
intended for implementation immediately after the NC meeting 17 August 2000
and will thus be in place for the NC meeting 21 September 2000.
Objectives of the IC committee
Proposing the agenda for NC meetings
Proposing an efficient means of running NC meetings
Composition of the Intake Committee
The IC should be small and flexible to facilitate meetings
and discussion.
Explicitly the IC should not comprise representatives
from each NC constituency for the following reasons:
- A situation where one constituency's important issue is proposed to the
intake committee who reject it for no good reason and then that constituency
says nothing more is highly unlikely. The ignored party would raise a point
of order at the start of the NC meeting or lobby the NC chairman or post to
the NC list.
- The danger of a "representative" intake committee is that it becomes a
forum for substantive discussion and removes power from the NC. The key
debating ground becomes the intake committee not the NC.
Rules for proposing an agenda for NC meetings
Listserve
An IC e-mail address shall be created (Intake suggestions)
whereby any of the following persons can make proposals for NC agenda
items:
- members of the Names Council
- the Names Council secretariat
- members of the ICANN Board
- members of the General Assembly (GA) defined as subscribers to the
ga@dnso.org or announce@dnso.org lists
- subscribers to an active DNSO ad hoc working group
There will be a limit of one posting per day and the IC shall
have sole discretion to deal with abusive activity. The Intake suggestions
list will be publicly archived.
Agenda Items
The IC shall be responsible for:
- drafting and prioritising NC agendas
- combining agenda items with a common theme
- delaying or rejecting proposed items or passing them onto more
appropriate bodies if they are not relevant NC issues.
In order for a topic to be discussed at a Names Council
meeting, it must be presented to the IC no later than 21 days before the
meeting.
The IC shall propose a guillotine (time limit) for each
agenda item. IC members are encouraged to remind the chair of these limits
during a meeting if necessary.
The IC shall post the agenda for a meeting no later than 14
days before the meeting.
Where there is disagreement within the IC issues will be
settled by a simple majority vote or referred to the NC at the discretion of
the IC chair.
When there are items which have been rejected for agenda
inclusion by the IC, NC members shall have 7 days to submit an objection which
will count as a vote against the IC rejection. Non-votes will be deemed an
acceptance of the IC's decision, and a majority of the votes shall rule.
Reports and declarations
No later than 7 days before the NC meeting, all reports or
proposed declarations relating to forthcoming agenda items must be distributed
to the NC.
Exceptions
The Intake Committee shall have the sole discretion to
deviate from these procedures when externalities dictate.
Rules for running NC meetings
Meetings Schedule
Meetings must be scheduled by the NC chair with at least 14
days notice, except in emergency situations which shall be decided upon by the
Intake Committee.
Starting on January 1, 2001, and for every year thereafter,
the NC chair shall finalise a schedule of all meetings during that calendar
year by the last day of January of that year. NC members may request changes
to the schedule during the year which may be agreed upon by the chair in
consultation with the NC, subject to the minimum period of notice above.
In any given year, the time of the meetings may vary to
accommodate the different geographic regions represented by Names Council
members. By way of guidance start times corresponding to local time earlier
than 06.00 and later than 23.00 should be avoided.
Voting and Quorum
The IC sees no reason at this time to seek a change in the
simple majority vote and quorum for the NC specified in the by-laws VI-B 2(h).
Proxies
When an NC member is unable to participate in an NC meeting
or NC committee, they may give their proxy (with due instruction on voting
where appropriate) to another NC member.
Speaking at meetings
Both at physical and telephone meetings the NC chair will
recognise three types of intervention in the following order of priority:
- A point of order
- A point of information
- A normal substantive intervention
At a physical meeting, an NC member may raise a hand or
during a teleconference an NC member may speak over the dialogue and say
immediately "point of order". The chair will suspend discussion and hear the
point.
Points of information and normal interventions. At a physical
meeting, an NC member may raise a hand and wait to be recognised by the chair
and during a teleconference an NC member may speak in an appropriate gap and
say immediately "their name to speak". This will be noted by the chair who
will invite the intervention in due course.
To ensure balance, the chair has the discretion to delay an
intervention by a frequent speaker to allow others to speak. Such discretion
should not be exercised for a "point of information". A point of information
is for NC members seeking information from the chair or other NC members about
meaning or procedure - it is specifically not intended to provide
information.
Names Council chair
The NC chair will be elected by the members of the NC by
simple majority vote and will hold office for a period of six months. One
renewal, subject to a fresh vote, of six months will be allowed. A retiring
chairman will not be eligible for re-election for a period of one year.
Trial period and Berkman Center proposals
The IC proposes the above recommendations, which are
intentionally simple and flexible, be trialled for 3 months and then adopted.
These recommendations have their origin in the detailed and prescriptive
proposals made by the US-based Berkman Center for Internet and Society, for
which diligence the NC offers its appreciation. Bearing in mind the more
flexible modus operandi of the NC in the time since the Berkman proposals were
made, the IC does not propose at this time that they are adopted as currently
drafted.
See:
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/dnso/ncprocedure/
Should there be deficiencies apparent during the period of
trial then the IC will return to the detailed suggestions made by the Berkman
Center to see which procedures may assist in overcoming such deficiencies.
Always an objective will be the pragmatic, flexible, open, and efficient
operation of the Names Council.