[registration-issues-wg] [CPWG] [GTLD-WG] Next possible move related to GDPR

Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond ocl at gih.com
Thu Sep 6 07:23:58 UTC 2018

Dear Jonathan,

remaining neutral, you mention contracted parties and the NCUC. I have
also heard from exactly these people that the intolerant are Businesses,
the IPC and Governments. So everyone appears to be seeing everyone else
as intolerant.
Kindest regards,


On 05/09/2018 21:56, Jonathan Zuck wrote:
> Good thoughts Roberto. Of course, in this particular case, the
> intolerant minority has MAJORITY representation on the EPDP. Between
> all of the contracted parties and the NCUC (all three of whom can be
> pretty intolerant at times) the “majority” are outnumbered considerably.
> *From:* GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org> *On Behalf
> Of *Roberto Gaetano
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 5, 2018 3:52 PM
> *To:* Evan Leibovitch <evanleibovitch at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* Holly Raiche <h.raiche at internode.on.net>; CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] Next possible
> move related to GDPR
> Hi Evan.
> Thanks for your referenced article. It was long reading, but had good
> points.
> However, I found the article uncorrelated to the matter under
> discussion, that is minority vs majority, because the article only
> makes the point that "The Most Intolerant Wins”, as stated in the
> title. All the examples are pointing to cases in which a minority, if
> intolerant, can win over the majority, but obviously there are other
> cases (and I believe we all can figure out examples) where the
> majority is intolerant and wins. The lesson that I learn from the
> article - and I am willing to admit that this was not the objective of
> the writer - is that we have the “Dictatorship of the Intolerant” -
> not necessarily the dictatorship of the minority.
> So, this article in realty confirms me of the need of being flexible,
> i.e. neither intransigent nor intolerant, and open to dialogue and
> compromise, if we really want to make a change.
> Cheers,
> Roberto
> On 04.09.2018, at 16:58, Evan Leibovitch
> <evanleibovitch at gmail.com<mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com
> <mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com%3cmailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com>>>
> wrote:
> Hi Holly,
> I'm with Carlton on this.
> I would remind all to recall the reason we are here: ICANN Bylaw Section
> 12.2(d)(i):
> *The role of the ALAC shall be to consider and provide advice on the
> activities of ICANN, insofar as they relate to the interests individual
> Internet users.*
> We are here (primarily, arguably exclusively) to (a) determine positions
> based on the needs of the billions of Internet users and (b) advance those
> positions within ICANN as strongly as possible. Our role is not to
> consider
> and balance all sides before-the-fact; that is for the greater
> community-based negotiation and ultimately the Board. We are here as
> advocates, not conciliators.
> Like it or not, ICANN is an adversarial environment in which (Holly and
> Tijani, you both know this as well as anyone) historically the needs of
> end-users have taken a back seat to all other interests. If At-Large does
> not clearly articulate the needs of end users, nobody will -- indeed that
> is our singular role in ICANN --  and even when we do we're not always
> listened to. Of course reasonable result and compromise are possible, but
> let's not handicap our positions before we start. There's been little
> "balance" or consideration shown to date by those who have already made
> enforcement of existing ICANN abuse regulations a nightmare and would
> eagerly roll back even the meagre attempts at protection that already
> exist.
> When the tolerant and reasonable encounter the intolerant and
> unreasonable,
> even if the tolerant are far greater in numbers, the latter gets its way
> <https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15>
> .
> Cheers,
> Evan
> On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 at 07:58, Holly Raiche
> <h.raiche at internode.on.net<mailto:h.raiche at internode.on.net
> <mailto:h.raiche at internode.on.net%3cmailto:h.raiche at internode.on.net>>>
> wrote:
> Folks
> First - Carlton, while I almost always agree with you, I”m afraid that,
> this time, I think Bastiaan has made a very good argument and I agree with
> his statement - which is even more impressive since English is not his
> first language.  Well done Bastiaan.
> And for Carlton - I still think we are on the same page - or close to.
> And to borrow from a presentation I recently attended: the issue isn’t
> privacy versus security; it is really an issue of one aspect of security
> versus another - both are necessary.
> Holly
> On 4 Sep 2018, at 8:43 pm, Bastiaan Goslings
> <bastiaan.goslings at ams-ix.net<mailto:bastiaan.goslings at ams-ix.net
> <mailto:bastiaan.goslings at ams-ix.net%3cmailto:bastiaan.goslings at ams-ix.net>>>
> wrote:
> On 4 Sep 2018, at 12:22, Carlton Samuels
> <carlton.samuels at gmail.com<mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com
> <mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com%3cmailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com>>>
> wrote:
> Bastiaan:
> You seem adept at destroying context to feed your allergy.
> I ’seem adept at destroying’?
> Ok, thank you… I am not an English native speaker so I had to look it up
> just to confirm what you might mean. You have a talent for (‘seem adept
> at’) phrasing your sentences quite archaically ;-)
> Anyway, perception is of course in the eye of the beholder, which I’ll
> have to respect and therefore cannot comment on. Suffice to say I
> completely disagree, I have no intention whatsoever to consciously destroy
> anything, I could have easily quoted someone else to make my point. One
> that still stands btw.
> My phrasing was in context of defining what I meant by majority. Your
> interpretation blithely ignored the contextual meaning..There  is a word
> for that I cannot recall at the minute.
> Kindly,
> -Carlton
> Right. Not very ‘kind’ from where I sit, but I am not going to take
> offence here.
> -Bastiaan

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/registration-issues-wg/attachments/20180906/57462eaf/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
CPWG mailing list
CPWG at icann.org

More information about the registration-issues-wg mailing list