<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">I’ve included an item on the draft agenda for the January 28 call about handling community process complaints. We have received a few:<div><br></div><div>Richard Hill on IETF process: <a href="http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum/msg00017.html">http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum/msg00017.html</a></div><div>Richard Hill on RIR process: <a href="http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum/msg00020.html">http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum/msg00020.html</a></div><div>Guru Acharya on RIR process: <a href="http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum/msg00024.html">http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum/msg00024.html</a></div><div><br></div><div>And there are some follow-up messages that you can see on the forum. <a href="http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum/">http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum/</a></div><div><br></div><div>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.</div><div><br></div><div>We can discuss this on the call but I wanted to get the discussion going on the mailing list first.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>Alissa</div></body></html>