[PC-NCSG] Fwd: [] For your review - proposed response deferral of motions

[Wendy Seltzer]

On 10/05/2012 09:39 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> 
> Any opinions on this resolution in the standing committee?

It sounds wrong to me, and does nothing to address the reasons the issue
was brought up in the first place. I'd say either we formalize deferral
practices or say nothing at all. Putting it more squarely in the chair's
discretion is unhelpful.

Thanks for the report!

--Wendy

> 
> thanks
> 
> avri
> 
> BTW, I have been the NCSG rep in the SCI for 2 years now.  Probably time to replace me.
> 
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
>> From: Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
>> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] For your review - proposed response deferral of motions
>> Date: 27 September 2012 03:59:05 EDT
>> To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org>
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> In relation to the issue of deferral of motions, please find below the latest version of the proposed response to the GNSO Council for review / approval on today's SCI meeting.
>>
>> With best regards,
>>
>> Marika
>>
>> Deferral of motions ? Proposed Response
>>
>> The SCI was asked to consider the current GNSO Council informal practice whereby a party may request the deferral of a motion to a later date in those situations where a formal process for a deferral is not specifically provided (for example, certain deferrals are foreseen as part of the GNSO PDP, see http://gnso.icann.org/council/annex-2-pdp-manual-16dec11-en.pdf). The SCI discussed this practice and whether there was a need to create a procedure to formalize this informal practice. After much debate, the SCI concluded that the current practice of allowing for the deferral of motions was done as a matter of courtesy at the discretion of the Chair of the GNSO Council.  For this reason, the SCI concluded that there was no need to create a formal procedure at this time.  However, the SCI felt that it was necessary to explicitly state that there is no rule that the Chair must always exercise his or her discretion in the affirmative. Given that the current informal practice is at the d
iscretion of the Chair, the Chair can exercise that same discretion in considering whether to grant or deny any request and can also exercise his or her discretion when determining how to handle any specific situation that may occur with regard to this informal practice.  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 


-- 
Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project
http://wendy.seltzer.org/
https://www.chillingeffects.org/
https://www.torproject.org/
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/