I endorse Karel, having previously been on the SCI I believe he would be a
great addition.

Regards
Cintra Sooknanan
On 2 Nov 2015 08:37, "Karel Douglas" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> I have read up on some of the documents and browsed the SCI site with the
> current work up for consideration, previous work done in 2014, 2013 , etc
> and would be happy to volunteer as an alternate.
>
> I hoping that my legal training and experience in corporate
> governance would benefit the SCI.
>
> kind regards
>
> Karel DOUGLAS
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Karel Douglas <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
>> WOW...that was fast!  :-)
>>
>> Thanks AMR for your very comprehensive and detailed reply. Yes - your
>> answer has helped!
>>
>> I will certainly do some reading up on the SCI charter and take a look at
>> the public record of the work done to date by the SCI.
>>
>> Many thanks buddy!
>>
>> kind regards
>>
>> Karel
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Amr Elsadr <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Karel,
>>>
>>> > On Oct 30, 2015, at 2:35 PM, Karel Douglas <[log in to unmask]>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Thanks Avri et al
>>> >
>>> > Avri - blunt and to the point is always appreciated.
>>> >
>>> > As a newbie I have a couple brief questions which are flying around my
>>> head :
>>> >
>>> > (1) how often does the SCI meet to discuss changes to the documents?
>>>
>>> Usually once every two weeks for one hour as long as there are ongoing
>>> projects the SCI is working on. When there are projects, most of the work
>>> (as is the case with all groups) takes place offline and over email. In the
>>> past, temporary sub-teams have also been set up to work intensively on
>>> something, before review by the full committee.
>>>
>>> > (2) how do suggested amendments / improvements get to the SCI...are
>>> improvements generated by regular internal review in the SCI or are
>>> suggested changes transmitted by GNSO / NCUC / NPOC to the SCI for review
>>> ,report and recommendation?
>>>
>>> The SCI has the discretion to suggest initiation of work on a certain
>>> topic, but this needs to be communicated to the GNSO Council. Normally, it
>>> is the Council that passes on questions/puzzles to the SCI, and ask the
>>> committee to have some fun with it.
>>>
>>> In the recent past, there was an attempt by a GNSO constituency to
>>> directly request the SCI to take up a project, but this was deemed as
>>> outside the normal process. If (for example) NCUC or NPOC want the SCI to
>>> review something, they would need to advise their representatives on the
>>> GNSO Council, and ask them to take it up with the full council first.
>>>
>>> > (3) How are suggested changes eventually made? Is it unilaterally or
>>> does it come back for approval of the GNSO EC and /or membership.
>>>
>>> The SCI needs to achieve full consensus on any recommended changes it
>>> makes to the GNSO operating procedures. Before forwarding its
>>> recommendations to the council, a public comment period needs to be held,
>>> then finally a motion and a vote on the GNSO council for the GNSO to adopt
>>> the recommended changes. If ICANN bylaws need to be amended for any
>>> reasons, the ICANN board will need to hold a public comment period of its
>>> own, and have its own resolution to adopt changes.
>>>
>>> > Even if I don't put my hat in the ring I would love to hear more about
>>> the SCI. I guess there is an SCI operating procedures manual lying around
>>> somewhere which speak to these matters. Maybe you could provide a link to
>>> it.Many thanks
>>>
>>> Here is a link to the SCI’s charter:
>>> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/2.+Charter. There is also a
>>> public record of all the work done by the SCI on its wiki page, so take
>>> time to browse through it, if you’re interested.
>>>
>>> I hope this helps.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Amr
>>
>>
>>
>