[Internal-cg] Response to Richard Hill

[Paul Wilson]

+1

Good response.

On 13 Aug 2015, at 6:08, Russ Mundy wrote:

> Alissa,
>
> This response certainly sounds reasonable to me.  I did note a couple 
> of grammatical/typo type nits that I’ve noted inline.
>
> Russ M
>
> On Aug 11, 2015, at 5:41 PM, Alissa Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in> wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> Here is a proposed response to this comment. What do you think?
>>
>> Alissa
>>
>> ----
>>
>> Dear Richard,
>>
>> Thank you for submitting your comments to the ICG. We note your view 
>> on the process for consensus in CWG Stewardship for the document 
>> produced.
>> The ICG also notes that the CWG Stewardship has taken notice of your 
>> view as explained in email from Lise Fuhr that can be found here: 
>> <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/2015-August/004054.html>.
>>
>> The ICG evaluation of how the CWG Stewardship process meets the NTIA 
>> requirements is in the ICG document that is out for open consultation 
>> as explained here: 
>> <https://www.ianacg.org/calls-for-input/combined-proposal-public-comment-period/>.
>>
>> Regrading the specific question on what is the basis for ICG to 
>> evaluate comments addressed to the
>
> Regarding
>
>> operational communities, please have a look at section 2a in the ICG 
>> comments handling process 
>> <https://www.ianacg.org/icg-files/documents/Community-Comments-Handling-1May15-final.pdf>, 
>> which says "ICG in its discretion will raise the issues or question 
>> to the relevant OC with a request that they provide a timely and 
>> appropriate reply." This was exactly what ICG did.
>>
>> In general the ICG had the ability at any time to make a statement as 
>> long as we fulfil our mandate and
>
>                               has
>
>> charter. Furthermore, the original comments posted in the ICG Forum 
>> were not addressed to the CWG Stewardship but instead addressed to 
>> the ICG, and because of that the ICG did take action.
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>>
>> Alissa Cooper on behalf of the ICG
>>
>>
>> On Aug 7, 2015, at 3:00 AM, Jennifer Chung <jen at icgsec.asia> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> The following comment has been posted to the ICG Forum today:
>>>
>>> 7 August – “Comment on handling of my previous comment on the 
>>> CWG-Stewardship proposal” from Richard Hill.
>>>
>>> http://mm.ianacg.org/pipermail/icg-forum_ianacg.org/2015-August/000003.html
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> Jennifer
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Internal-cg mailing list
>>> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
>>> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Internal-cg mailing list
>> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
>> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org

________________________________________________________________________
Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC                        dg at apnic.net
http://www.apnic.net                                            @apnicdg