All ,

In light of Stefania's email where she indicated that she had
already telegraphed her interest to the Committee , and in the spirit of
consensus in the community I would respectfully withdraw my "candidacy" as
a volunteer.

Best regards

Karel DOUGLAS

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 1:07 PM, James Gannon <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> I think Stefania as a new councillor would get a double dose of value for
> us in this position.
>
> -James
>
>
>
>
> On 02/11/2015, 5:03 p.m., "NCSG-Discuss on behalf of "Kleinwächter,
> Wolfgang"" <[log in to unmask] on behalf of
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> >1+ for Stefania
> >
> >wolfgang
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> >Von: NCSG-Discuss im Auftrag von Milan, Stefania
> >Gesendet: Mo 02.11.2015 13:41
> >An: [log in to unmask]
> >Betreff: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Call for volunteers: New SCI representative &
> alternate
> >
> >Dear all
> >
> >I have already made my availability known to the NCSG Policy Committee
> but forgot to do so on this list.
> >
> >I believe serving on SCI would be particularly helpful in view of my
> recent election to the GNSO Council.
> >
> >Best, Stefania
> >
> >________________________________
> >Da: NCSG-Discuss <[log in to unmask]> per conto di Karel
> Douglas <[log in to unmask]>
> >Inviato: lunedì 2 novembre 2015 13.36
> >A: [log in to unmask]
> >Oggetto: Re: Call for volunteers: New SCI representative & alternate
> >
> >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]
> <mailto:[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]<mailto:
> [log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> >Hi Karel,
> >
> >> On Oct 30, 2015, at 2:35 PM, Karel Douglas <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[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
> >
> >
> >
> >The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
> material.. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution,
> forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this
> information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is
> prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received
> this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the
> material from any computer.
>