<div dir="ltr"><div><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 0pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">Dear Alissa,</span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 0pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">Pls be reminded that in the Consensus
building document that we worked for several <span>�</span>months<span>�
</span>ago in which there was no <span>�</span>mention
<span>�</span>of so-called \u201cROUGHT CONSENSUS \u201cwhich is
practiced in your own community and not in ICG .That rough or soft consensus
was strongly rejected. Please carefully read that consensus building document .It
is not appropriate that such document which established the basis of our works
and completed after more than 300 e-email message be ignored </span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 0pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">We need to be consistent and respect our
earlier decision and agreement.</span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 0pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">My suggestions for a simple rewording has
been supported and you need to take that into account</span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 0pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">I do not agree with your position as it
is not consistent with what we have decided before . You can not ignor all
those agreement and just refer to \u201cROUGH CONSENSUS \u201cwhich was totally disagreed
from the very beginning </span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 0pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">We need to be practical and comply with
our charter.</span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 0pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">Comments received should first be
considered by ICG, if it requires reply, the reply should be give. If it needs
to be sent to OCs ofor further analysis and reply ,once so decided by ICG that
action should be done.</span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 0pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">The decision making ENITY is ICG and not
the OCs .</span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 0pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">Comments received should not left as an
optional process by OCs they must be treated properly.</span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 0pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">Many evidence were witnessed that some
OC do not wish to answer the questions</span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 6.75pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">Then
what is the role of the ICG?</span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 6.75pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">Community
expects a proper action from ICG,</span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 6.75pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">The
issue is not so difficult</span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 6.75pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">Pls
do not make a mass of that.</span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 6.75pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">Joseph
has made some edits, Milton implicitly agreed with my edits</span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 6.75pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">Pls
keep calm and allow us to work. Make your efforts to converge and not to
diverge</span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 6.75pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">This
is an important matter left from Singapore</span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 6.75pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">Regards</span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="background:white;margin:0in 0in 6.75pt;line-height:normal;vertical-align:middle"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:7pt">Kavouss
<span>�</span></span></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font></div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2015-04-16 11:56 GMT+02:00 Joseph Alhadeff <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com" target="_blank">joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Kavouss:<br>
<br>
We are in agreement except for one nuance.� When it comes to ICG I agree our actions are in our discretion and answers must come to us.<br>
<br>
�As you know, I have been an advocate of consultation and transparency; if a person sends us a question related to an OC propsal which we believe has been answered in the OC propsals or which we do not see as worthy of follow up- excluding the spam Patrik noted- we should still forward that question on an OC propsal to the OC in question so they can decide if they need to answer or explain their� actions further to optimize community consensus.� We need maximum transparency and consensus across all of our efforts...<br>
<br>
I hope this helps clarify the thinking related to the need to forward questions that should have better been addressed to the OC...<br>
<br>
Joe<br>
<span><br>
Sent from my Android phone using TouchDown (<a href="http://www.nitrodesk.com" target="_blank">www.nitrodesk.com</a>)<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
<br>
</span>From: Kavouss Arasteh [<a href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com">kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</a>]<br>
Received: Thursday, 16 Apr 2015, 4:41AM<br>
To: Joseph Alhadeff [<a href="mailto:joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com">joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com</a>]<br>
CC: <a href="mailto:paf@frobbit.se">paf@frobbit.se</a> [<a href="mailto:paf@frobbit.se">paf@frobbit.se</a>]; <a href="mailto:internal-cg@ianacg.org">internal-cg@ianacg.org</a> [<a href="mailto:internal-cg@ianacg.org">internal-cg@ianacg.org</a>]<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Consensus call: Community comments handling<br>
<br>
Dear Joseph<br>
Exactly . It is only and only ICG who decides to whether or not a comment received needs to be replied and not all comments.<br>
Once again the choice us within ICG and nit OCs<br>
Regards<br>
Kavouss<br>
<br>
Sent from my iPhone<br>
<br>
> On 16 Apr 2015, at 09:57, Joseph Alhadeff <<a href="mailto:joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com">joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> As to a it is our option not obligation to every comment.<br>
><br>
> Sent from my Android phone using TouchDown (<a href="http://www.nitrodesk.com" target="_blank">www.nitrodesk.com</a>)<br>
><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
><br>
> From: Patrik F�ltstr�m [<a href="mailto:paf@frobbit.se">paf@frobbit.se</a>]<br>
> Received: Thursday, 16 Apr 2015, 2:16AM<br>
> To: joseph alhadeff [<a href="mailto:joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com">joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com</a>]<br>
> CC: <a href="mailto:internal-cg@ianacg.org">internal-cg@ianacg.org</a> [<a href="mailto:internal-cg@ianacg.org">internal-cg@ianacg.org</a>]<br>
> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Consensus call: Community comments handling<br>
><br>
><br>
>> On 16 apr 2015, at 00:09, joseph alhadeff <<a href="mailto:joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com">joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Choices:<br>
>><br>
>> a.� We decide that the comment we received is worthy of our own follow up and it inspires us to ask the same or related question(s) to the proposal drafters. This we have the ability to do at all times.<br>
>> b.� As the comment goes to a proposal as opposed to our process or the joint proposal, we are not in a position to properly answer the question.� As such we could forward the question to the correct community, on the chance that the asker of the question may not have also addressed the community.<br>
>> c.� Since we are working transparently, I assume all of the questions we receive will be available online.� If a community commits to keeping watch for relevant comments then we don't have to worry about forwarding comments.<br>
>><br>
>> Options b and c in no way limit our rights and abilities under a.� b and c are merely concepts that assure the greatest transparency and assurance that comments are routed to those groups best able to address them.� It takes a no wrong door approach to comments and helps assure that those not familiar with the consultation process are also able to get their questions heard.<br>
><br>
><br>
> We also have d. various trolls and denial of service attacks that we can at point of inspection "just ignore". Specifically because of b. and c. And b. issues might be picked up by the OC themselves. Either because it was adressed to them as well as ICG, or because they saw it (according to c.).<br>
><br>
> I.e. we are inspired by whatever comments come in, and might ask/forward questions to the OC's. OC's can also watch the list and act themselves on whatever is sent in.<br>
><br>
> But I do not see us or OC be required to act on _every_ comment coming in. Specifically not having ICG send _every_ comment to the OC's for action.<br>
><br>
>� �Patrik<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Internal-cg mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Internal-cg@mm.ianacg.org">Internal-cg@mm.ianacg.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org" target="_blank">http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org</a></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>