<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type></HEAD>
<BODY
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space"
dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
<DIV>I agree<BR><BR>Wolf-Ulrich<BR><BR></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=alissa@cooperw.in
href="mailto:alissa@cooperw.in">Alissa Cooper</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Friday, July 10, 2015 2:30 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=internal-cg@ianacg.org
href="mailto:internal-cg@ianacg.org">internal-cg@ianacg.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Internal-cg] Assessment of input from Richard
Hill</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV>Draft letter text is below for your perusal.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dear CWG,
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The ICG has received the following from Richard Hill: <<A
href="http://mm.ianacg.org/pipermail/icg-forum_ianacg.org/2015-June/000001.html">http://mm.ianacg.org/pipermail/icg-forum_ianacg.org/2015-June/000001.html</A>>.
We would welcome your comments on any of Richards claims, but we have a
question about one specific claim below. We have included our views on his other
claims for your information. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="WIDOWS: 1">Regarding his claim about the final proposal not having
gone out for public comment, in our view what he suggests could yield a process
that never ends, given that further comments can always be provided whenever a
document is put out for public comment. Thus requiring a final document to be
put out for public comment is an unreasonable requirement for a process intended
to terminate.</DIV>
<DIV style="WIDOWS: 1"> </DIV>
<DIV style="WIDOWS: 1">Regarding his claim about the global multistakeholder
community, our understanding of the CWGs charter is that the group is open to
any interested participant.</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="WIDOWS: 1"><BR></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="WIDOWS: 1">Regarding his claim about his specific comments on
the proposal, we note that the CWG proposal states on p. 51 that "The final
proposal has received the consensus support of the CWG-Stewardship with no
objections or minority statements recorded for Chartering Organization
consideration. We note</SPAN><SPAN style="WIDOWS: 1"> that rationales were
given and CWG consensus positions explained for each comment received during the
public comment period that was not included in the proposal (including
Richards). In light of both the statement of consensus in the proposal and the
disposition of Richards comments in the public comment analysis tool, we are
writing to see if you have any further comment on this claim. </SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="WIDOWS: 1"><BR></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="WIDOWS: 1">A response would be appreciated by <insert date
here>.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="WIDOWS: 1"><BR></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="WIDOWS: 1">Thanks,</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="WIDOWS: 1">Alissa Cooper on behalf of the
ICG</SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<P>
<HR>
_______________________________________________<BR>Internal-cg mailing
list<BR>Internal-cg@mm.ianacg.org<BR>http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org<BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>