[CCWG-ACCT] Redactions in ICANN documents
avri at acm.org
Fri Jul 17 09:35:45 UTC 2015
Until such time as ewe have community standards on redactions, I think
including the contractual or other provision they are relying on for the
redaction, as Samantha did in her note, is a useful measure.
On 17-Jul-15 09:56, Chris Disspain wrote:
> I don’t believe much ‘convincing’ would be necessary el.
>> On 17 Jul 2015, at 17:52 , Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el at lisse.NA
>> <mailto:el at lisse.NA>> wrote:
>> I am wondering if we can perhaps convince ICANN to in the interim
>> when they redact documents, to write something like "Redacted on
>> request of ........" so that if we were to take ICANN staff by
>> their word that they only redact because of transparency (!) we
>> know at least which side they are on :-)-O
>> greetings, el
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community