[Internal-cg] Handling process complaints

Manal Ismail manal at tra.gov.eg
Wed Jan 28 07:59:32 UTC 2015

Thanks Alissa for adding this to the agenda and to enlightening comments received so far ..It's crucial that we continue to be transparent consistent and predictable throughout the handling of all complaints ..

Having said that, I feel I'm not that clear about a few things and hope you wouldn't mind my below questions ..


Generally speaking:

1.       Are we going to forward every complaint, formally, to the relevant Operational Community (OC)? Or depend on their accessibility on the web? 

2.       Are we going to reply to the complainer? how his/her complaint was considered? reasons for the ICG decision?

More specifically, I think we may run into one of the following situations:

1.       Complaints submitted for the first time directly to the ICG 

(My understanding is that those will be forwarded to the relevant OC)

2.       Complaints submitted to the ICG by way of a complaint/escalation 

(How to handle? forward formally to the relevant OC? expect an answer from the relevant OC? go through the mailing lists and dig the answer? …) 

a.       Complaints about the substance of the proposal

                                                               i.      Something overlooked 

(My understanding is that those will be forwarded to the relevant OC)

                                                             ii.      Something out of scope (How to handle? Who should decide?)

                                                            iii.      A point of view that did not make it to the submitted proposal 

(How to handle? decide whether it gained consensus, as defined by the OP? check whether the consensus process was followed? …) 

b.      Complaints about the process followed

                                                               i.      Not happy with the process as defined by the OC (nothing we can do)

                                                             ii.      Process was not followed (How to prove? How to handle?)

Apologies for the long message .. 

Looking forward to a fruitful discussion on the call later today ..


Kind Regards




From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 12:19 AM
To: Kavouss Arasteh; Alissa Cooper
Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Handling process complaints


I think we are not in disagreement about what options are given to handle the complaints.


At least the numbering Community (CRISP) pointed out on their respective mailing list that they expect guidance from the ICG. We should discuss it tomorrow.

Best regards



From: Kavouss Arasteh <mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>  

Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 7:38 PM

To: Alissa Cooper <mailto:alissa at cooperw.in>  

Cc: ICG <mailto:internal-cg at icann.org>  

Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Handling process complaints



You mentioned that you did not undertstand me .

I repeat what I said.

1.It seems that we have received commubnity  process  compèlaints .

2. You want to discuss how we should handle these compklaints 

3 These complaints were sent to the operating  communitites

4 We need to establish deadline  to receivive replies from operating communities   

5. You wish to establish deadline for receiving complaints .

6. Once we decide on that, we have to make a statement informing the communities to send comments .if any within that deadline

7. We will send the additional complaints, if any to operating community

8. We need to establish another dealine or maintain the same deadliner   to receivive replies from operating communities  for the second and last complaints



I hope that it would be clear now





2015-01-26 22:32 GMT+01:00 Alissa Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in>:

I’ve included an item on the draft agenda for the January 28 call about handling community process complaints. We have received a few: 


Richard Hill on IETF process: http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum/msg00017.html

Richard Hill on RIR process: http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum/msg00020.html

Guru Acharya on RIR process: http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum/msg00024.html


And there are some follow-up messages that you can see on the forum. http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum/


I’ve been forwarding these to the appropriate communities, but I think we need to be a little clearer about what we are expecting here. If we want responses from the communities, we should ask for them directly. If we go down that route, we should probably set a deadline for receiving complaints about this first phase of the process so that we can give the communities clear guidance about what they need to respond to and when.


We can discuss this on the call but I wanted to get the discussion going on the mailing list first.




Internal-cg mailing list
Internal-cg at icann.org



Internal-cg mailing list
Internal-cg at icann.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20150128/a3088b0d/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Internal-cg mailing list