[Internal-cg] Assessment of input from Richard Hill

[joseph alhadeff]

Perhaps on point one it might be useful to note that the process was 
open and with a number of public consultations, then go on to say that 
adding an additional consultation for the final document is a needless 
exercise for reasons stated?

On 7/9/2015 2:30 PM, Alissa Cooper wrote:
> Draft letter text is below for your perusal.
>
> —
>
> Dear CWG,
>
> The ICG has received the following from Richard Hill: 
> <http://mm.ianacg.org/pipermail/icg-forum_ianacg.org/2015-June/000001.html>. 
> We would welcome your comments on any of Richard’s claims, but we have 
> a question about one specific claim below. We have included our views 
> on his other claims for your information.
>
> 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.
>
> Regarding his claim about the global multistakeholder community, our 
> understanding of the CWG’s charter is that the group is open to any 
> interested participant.
>
> 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 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 
> Richard’s). In light of both the statement of consensus in the 
> proposal and the disposition of Richard’s comments in the public 
> comment analysis tool, we are writing to see if you have any further 
> comment on this claim.
>
> A response would be appreciated by <insert date here>.
>
> Thanks,
> Alissa Cooper on behalf of the ICG
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.ianacg.org/pipermail/internal-cg_ianacg.org/attachments/20150709/14603879/attachment.html>