Re: [council] Motion re Extension of Public Comment Periods

Of course we should aim at clarity at all times and not the at the particular technics of a certain legal term.

In any case, "suspension" is commonly used in opposition to "interruption" of a term so as to communicate that the time that has passed before an event or circumstance that suspended it is taken into account for the counting of the term after the event/circumstance ends. Its the difference between a "pause" (to suspend a term) and a "stop" (interruption - when you count the term all over again after the event/circumstance).

But I understand that we are not requesting the suspension or interruption of the term, but just a plain 7-day extension after the Meetings. It is much more simple and useful. As I am quite certain that we all would like to have such extension in all cases in which a overlap occurs, I totally agree with the wording of the proposed motion v.3.

The GNSO Council strongly urges ICANN Staff to extend, for seven days, any public comment periods which overlap with any of the seven days of an ICANN meeting.

2008/11/5 Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

I do not believe it is a good idea to suspend comment periods. Just make sure they are longer.

Chuck

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carlos Affonso Pereira de Souza
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 3:10 AM
To: GNSO Council
Subject: Re: [council] Motion re Extension of Public Comment Periods

Agreed. Thats why we could work with "suspend" as to indicate that as soon as the meeting starts the clock stops running for comment periods.

2008/11/5 Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

I am not sure we should restrict it to only comment periods that would end during an ICANN meeting. It seems to me that any comment period that overlaps an ICANN meeting should be extended.

Chuck

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 2:48 AM
To: 'GNSO Council'
Subject: RE: [council] Motion re Extension of Public Comment Periods

Thanks all for considering this late-breaking motion. Here is an amended version of the "Resolved" paragraph -- to clarify 'extension' vs. 'suspension…

RESOLVED:

The GNSO Council strongly urges ICANN Staff to extend, for seven days, any public comment periods which would otherwise end during the seven days of an ICANN meeting.

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 10:46 PM
To: GNSO Council
Subject: [council] Motion re Suspension of Public Comment Periods

Hi all: several Councilors would like to introduce and pass this motion today, whilst we have several different, significant and ongoing public comment periods. Therefore I make the motion…

Whereas, ICANN's meetings require the full attention of GNSO Councilors and many other GNSO participants.

Whereas, ICANN has many ongoing public comment periods of significant interest to many GNSO Councilors and participants.

Whereas, ICANN's typical comment periods are already difficult for many members of the ICANN community, particularly those that must consult with members of their Constituency and/or member organization(s).

RESOLVED:

The GNSO Council strongly urges ICANN Staff to extend all public comment periods which would otherwise end during an ICANN meeting, for seven days.

Mike Rodenbaugh

Rodenbaugh Law

PO Box 7775 #55819

San Francisco, CA 94120

+1.415.254.4590