[registration-issues-wg] [CPWG] [GTLD-WG] [ALAC] Fwd: [Gnso-epdp-team] BC Consensus Call Responses

Justine Chew justine.chew at gmail.com
Mon Feb 18 07:48:13 UTC 2019


Michele,

I did read Matt's email before putting my support across. I also read
Alan's reply to Matt which I suggest you also read.

We can agree to disagree on the positions taken and manner in which those
positions have been put forward.

Regards,

Justine
-----


On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 15:32, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <
michele at blacknight.com> wrote:

> Justine
>
>
>
> I strongly disagree not only with the position being taken by BC / IPC and
> supported by ALAC, but even more so by the manner in which it has been put
> forward.
>
>
>
> Please read Matt Serlin’s email (
> https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/2019-February/001692.html
> )which clearly articulates why the IPC / BC position is so offensive due to
> the way that it has been communicated.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Michele
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Mr Michele Neylon
>
> Blacknight Solutions
>
> Hosting, Colocation & Domains
>
> https://www.blacknight.com/
>
> http://blacknight.blog/
>
> Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
>
> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
>
> Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
>
> Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
>
> -------------------------------
>
> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
>
> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of
> Justine Chew <justine.chew at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Monday 18 February 2019 at 08:17
> *To: *Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
> *Cc: *ICANN list <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>, CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] [ALAC] Fwd: [Gnso-epdp-team] BC Consensus
> Call Responses
>
>
>
> Alan,
>
> At this juncture, since a 'majority' of CPWG (and ALAC?) has opted to
> support the ALAC Statement that was submitted, I would venture that any
> effort to clarify or explicitly lends to ALAC's mandate ... consumer
> protection, trust, cybersecurity etc ... should be supported.
>
> Further, I see no inconsistency between the ALAC submitted statement and
> the amendments submitted by IPC/BC to the EPDP Team Final Report and remain
> guided by you and Hadia as to the actual details which were discussed by
> the EPDP and agreed or not agreed vs included in or omitted from the Final
> Report for whatever reason -- your reply to the "one negative message"
> refers.
>
> ** I noted that IPC/BC did not hesitate to say they "cannot support" the
> Final Report without the 5 amendments being made --- it will be interesting
> to monitor how these amendments will be dealt with by the EPDP.*
>
>
>
> *In short, yes, I fully and strongly support IPC/BC's suggested
> amendments.*
>
>
> Justine Chew
> -----
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 10:41, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
> wrote:
>
> Thanks Cheryl. If others agree, please speak up QUICKLY. If Internet speed
> was fast, EPDP speed is even faster and we already have one negative
> message -
> https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/2019-February/001692.html.
>
> Alan
> --
> Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos.
>
> On February 17, 2019 8:47:36 PM EST, Cheryl Langdon-Orr <
> langdonorr at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Alan and Hadia,
>
>
>
> Thank you for passing this on, from my purely personal perspective, the
> IPC/BC proposed text amendments to the Final Draft of the EPDP Phase 1
> Report, is that they are indeed, as indicated by you Alan, well worthy of
> receiving ALAC/At-Large support.
>
>
>
> Firstly, they are it seems to me, in keeping with a few concerns and
> considerations on some matters raised in your discussions with the CPWG,
> and also reflecting the views and preferences articulated by the majority
> of active participants in the WG.
>
>
>
> They also, in my view, act as enhancements and improvements to the
> existing Draft Final Text, in the manner in which they seek to ensure
> greater specificity and clarity about the purpose and expectations of the
> following Phase 2 work of the EPDP Team, in addition to providing valuable
> timeline information and guidance to the key actors/stakeholders engaged in
> and affected by GDPR, in the near and medium term and provide both greater
> surety and predictability to the Full Consensus outcomes of that work.
>
>
>
> I would, therefore, encourage the ALAC and the rest of the CPWG / At-Large
> Community to support your endorsement of this proposed text as 'friendly
> amendments' (more than actually) to the Final Report...
>
>
>
>
>
> [image: Image removed by sender.]
> <https://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_medium=email_sig&utm_campaign=gmail_api&utm_content=thumb>
>
> [image: Image removed by sender.]
>
> *Cheryl Langdon-Orr*
>
> about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr
> <https://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_medium=email_sig&utm_campaign=gmail_api&utm_content=thumb>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 10:45, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
> wrote:
>
> I think it is safe to say that we fully and strongly support these
> suggested changes. Any disagreement?
>
> Alan
>
>
> From: Margie Milam <margiemilam at fb.com>
> To: "gnso-epdp-team at icann.org" <gnso-epdp-team at icann.org>
> Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2019 17:28:44 +0000
> Subject: [Gnso-epdp-team] BC Consensus Call Responses
>
>
> Dear Colleagues-
>
> The BC and IPC members have been working hard over the weekend to develop
> our response to the consensus call and GNSO Council voting on the Final
> Report for EPDP Phase 1
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_EOTSFGRD_g.-2BDraft-2BFinal-2BReport-3Fpreview-3D_102145109_104237485_EPDP-2520Team-2520Draft-2520Final-2520Report-2520-2D-2520Redline-2520-2D-2520version-252016-2520February-25202019.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=_4XWSt8rUHZPiRG6CoP4Fnk_CCk4p550lffeMi3E1z8&m=JeJV68_XA0ovurRrcT2fYYDnJIRHwZ_8MSTwyFhaG1A&s=8u2KQZGE49aFP7yFTnfWTiuyyqvJR8V9PDy5tnqBRJU&e=>.
>
>
> The attached response is just 3 pages long, and reflects close
> collaboration with the IPC, listing five minor amendments to the Final
> Report in order to obtain BC and IPC support.
>
> We hope to discuss these items with you this week.
>
> All the best,
>
> Margie Milam and Mark Svancarek
> BC Representatives on the EPDP
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-epdp-team mailing list
> Gnso-epdp-team at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
>
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/registration-issues-wg/attachments/20190218/2ffd0d22/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg


More information about the registration-issues-wg mailing list