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. >