[Wp4] Fwd: Re: [] Variety of formulation for Human Rights bylaw that were made. - corrected

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

I will just state up front that I am beginning to see this conversation
as setting the stage to say "Oh but it is too hard for us to define this
... Human rights might be dangerous"

And that I reject in the strongest terms.  If we need to spend months
trying to 'understand' what the pig people are so afraid of looks like,
then fine, lets spend the time and start from the beginning with the
assumption that no one in this group knows what human rights are.

avri


On 06-Aug-15 15:12, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
>
> I like to add my +1 to Greg on this one; Committing to a general HR
> statement that is not clearly scored/defined could be dangerous,
> especially as we would not like any major change to be done on
> anything that has been agreed upon in WS1
>
> Regards
>
> On 6 Aug 2015 7:28 pm, "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc at gmail.com
> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     I think we need to do more than just wordsmith a simple statement
>     if its going to be a part of ICANN's core values in the ICANN
>     bylaws.  The bylaws provision is just the tip of the iceberg.  We
>     need to have a common understanding of what we mean and what
>     existing human rights standards (declarations, conventions, etc.)
>     we are referring to, and we need to have a sense of the
>     consequences (intended and otherwise) of our efforts.  Some of us
>     may have spent many years and many hours working with and getting
>     to understand the human rights landscape; others have not.  Some
>     of us may say we know what we mean when we refer to human rights. 
>     That's not enough.  We all need to know what we mean, and we need
>     to know that we mean basically the same thing.  This doesn't have
>     to be exhaustive (or exhausting).
>
>     There's certain a lot of work that can be put into WS2, in terms
>     of fleshing things out, considering issues such as impacts
>     assessments, reviews, etc.  But we can't just stop with a
>     statement and leave its meaning for WS2.  Otherwise, we are just
>     buying a pig in a poke.* 
>
>     Greg
>     ________
>     * Recognizing this is a somewhat culturally specific term, I offer
>     a brief explanation. "Poke" is an archaic term for a bag, the
>     advice literally being given is 'don't buy a pig until you have
>     seen it.'  Per Wikipedia, "The phrase can also be applied to
>     accepting an idea or plan without a full understanding of its
>     basis."  In the English language, this can be traced back to at
>     least 1530:  
>
>         /Fraser's Magazine,/ 1858, reprinted a piece from Richard
>         Hill's (or Hilles') /Common-place Book/, 1530, which gave this
>         advice to market traders:
>         "When ye proffer the pigge open the poke."
>          http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/a-pig-in-a-poke.html
>
>
>     NB:  This is apparently not the same Richard Hill dealt with from
>     time to time in these and other lists. It is presumably a complete
>     coincidence that the said Mr. Hill's organization is called APIG. 
>
>     On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Dr Eberhard Lisse <el at lisse.na
>     <mailto:el at lisse.na>> wrote:
>
>         Avri,
>
>         I am in full agreement with you.
>
>         We need something we can all live with in WS1 and can sort out the
>         casualties in WS2, if any.
>
>         el
>
>         On 2015-08-06 17:40, Avri Doria wrote:
>         > Hi,
>         >
>         > In this case I think there may be a number of solutions that are
>         > right, especially when we remember all we are trying to do
>         for WS1
>         > is to record a bylaws commitment to respect human rights in the
>         > work ICANN does.  We are not trying to solve all the complex of
>         > issues that we may want too bring up.  We need to find a way to
>         > just pick one.
>         >
>         > I really think trying to wordsmith as simple a statement as
>         > possible is still out best alternative.
>         >
>         > Though I can think of no better reason to miss our deadlines
>         than
>         > a discussion of ICANN's Corporate responsibility to respect
>         human
>         > rights, something I think I could work on forever, it would be
>         > nice if we didn't miss the deadline because of the discussion.
>         > But if we do miss the deadline, that's life.  We have seen that
>         > the sky does not fall when a deadline is missed.  And this is
>         > important.
>         >
>         > avri
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         > On 06-Aug-15 09:25, Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:
>         >> Avri,
>         >>
>         >> we need to get this right.
>         >>
>         >> We are not going to let the outcome dictated by arbitrary and
>         >> self imposed time frames.
>         >>
>         >> el
>         [...]
>         _______________________________________________
>         Wp4 mailing list
>         Wp4 at icann.org <mailto:Wp4 at icann.org>
>         https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Wp4 mailing list
>     Wp4 at icann.org <mailto:Wp4 at icann.org>
>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wp4 mailing list
> Wp4 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus