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 >> >> >> >