[Internal-cg] Steps for handling ICG forum comments ..

[Daniel Karrenberg]

On 13.03.15 3:37 , Lynn St.Amour wrote:
> Hello Joe, colleagues,
> 
> I am following up on our open action item on "Steps for handling ICG forum comments" (with thanks to Manal for her excellent work on the document).   It seems there is fairly significant agreement on the overall approach, which is not surprising given our discussion in Singapore (note: the minutes from Day 2 of our Singapore meeting cover this topic quite well); and I believe we only need agreement on the point below in order to close.   Other relatively minor edits were suggested and can be addressed secondarily.   Kavouss, at the same time, we can review the document for the redundancy you commented on.
> 
> Briefly, there have been two views put forward:
> 
> 1 - Kavouss (comment taken from the document in dropbox):  "It is not appropriate to leave the option to the operational  community to  receive, forwarded copied of comments or express preference to self monitor the ICG form .It is fundamental that ICG decides on the matter abnd not to leave it to the operational communities to choose receibving I or being forwarded  or selfmonitor. ICG is the sole and only instant 7entitty which has the right to decide on the matter."
> 
> 2 - Joe (comment from email below):  "I believe that the consensus that emerged in the room had included providing the option to communities to monitor the comments themselves, but in such case we would ask them to confirm this in writing. I think all were agreed that we should not decide the "value" of comments addressed to community proposals as that was beyond our remit, though we could use those comments to help formulate our own questions…"
> 
> As there have been only a handful of ICG members that have commented, it would be helpful to hear from a few more on this point.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Lynn
> 
>


2 is what I recall and fully agree with.

Daniel