I don't think an Ombudsman has an obligation to forward information about a complaint full stop.
I believe that there is no obligation to forward unless there is an agreement to do so by the Ombudsman and the complainant.
Then and only then does the Ombudsman have a duty other than to provide counsel and advice to the complainant.
I think that's fine. Still, I don't think that the rules should require the Ombudsman to forward inquiries about dominance.
Per the latest draft rule discussion circulated by James, the Subgroup Chair shall report a suspicion or complaint of dominance. There is no such obligation on the Ombudsman to make such a report. I think that's the way it should be. If an individual has a concern about dominance but is not ready to raise a formal complaint, I think the individual should be able to raise concerns c*nf*d*ntially with the Ombudsman without triggering a formal complaint.
Along those lines, I suggest that we change the circulated dominance text as follows:
If a Sponsor Subgroup Chair suspects that an authorized activity <ins>within that Subgroup<ins> is potentially dominated, as defined in the IEEE Standards Board Bylaws, or receives a complaint of dominance <ins>within that Subgroup<ins>, that Sponsor Subgroup Chair shall report the complaint or suspicion the Sponsor Chair.
The intention is to eliminate ambiguity about whether each Sponsor Subgroup Chair is responsible for dominance in all the other Sponsor Subgroups.
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1