[Bylaws] Approval of New Process For GNSO Charter Amendments

[Tapani Tarvainen]

On Oct 03 11:55, William Drake (wjdrake at gmail.com) wrote:


> On Oct 3, 2013, at 11:32 AM, Tapani Tarvainen <ncuc at TAPANI.TARVAINEN.INFO> wrote:
> > If I understand this right, we should formulate the new bylaws and
> > vote on them before any interaction with staff is needed (other
> > than being notified we're about to do it).

OK, I expressed that badly: I meant "before any _formal_ interaction
is _required_".

> In the past staff has always expected to be consulted during the
> "Phase I" process of drafting

Of course we should be happy about any advice from the staff.
But the point was that there's no formal process that'd
inevitably delay the vote.

> what would be the point of asking members to vote
> on a text that hasn't been cleared through the staff

Formally that's the way it has to be though, if I understand
the new procedure correctly: the staff will not and cannot
formally clear it before we've voted on it.

Informal advice is another matter, and if staff is willing
to engage in the drafting process, great.

> We could conceivably end up having to put members through a second
> corrective vote, which would be a big pain

Yes, of course. We should do our best to make sure our proposal
will pass staff & board before we put it to the vote.
But we won't get formal clearance from the staff in advance.

> So I would suggest reading the "notify staff" a little expansively
> to avoid subsequent headaches.

I would be happy even to have staff joining this list right now
and consulting/commenting whenever they see fit.

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen