<div dir="ltr"><div><br> It would be best to engage the Board members on the CCWG to understand better what scenarios they identified with the language. (And I think it would be good for us to give concrete examples of actual breach of human rights within ICANN that we are concerned about - that can focus the minds/conversation)</div><div>Paul +1</div><div>Kavouss</div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2015-12-19 15:28 GMT+01:00 Seun Ojedeji <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com" target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span><p dir="ltr">On Dec 18, 2015 23:18, "Paul Twomey" <<a href="mailto:paul.twomey@argopacific.com" target="_blank">paul.twomey@argopacific.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
> It would be best to engage the Board members on the CCWG to understand better what scenarios they identified with the language. (And I think it would be good for us to give concrete examples of actual breach of human rights within ICANN that we are concerned about - that can focus the minds/conversation)<br>
></p>
</span><p dir="ltr">SO: +1 to that. The IAB's comment was mute (neutral) about this, don't know if the NRO-EC will be making comment on this subject as well.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Regards<span><br>
> Paul Twomey<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On 12/19/15 1:13 AM, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> It’s OK Niels, they also think that increased transparency is against the global public interest. I infer that they think that the GPI is equivalent to whatever gives them the least amount of constraint and the greatest amount of obscured power.<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> To say I am disappointed in the Board is to understate the matter.<br>
>><br>
>> Paul<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> Paul Rosenzweig<br>
>><br>
>> <a href="mailto:Paul.rosenzweig@gmail.com" target="_blank">Paul.rosenzweig@gmail.com</a><br>
>><br>
>> <a href="tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20329-9650" target="_blank" value="+12023299650">+1 (202) 329-9650</a><br>
>><br>
>> VOIP: <a href="tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20738-1739" target="_blank" value="+12027381739">+1 (202) 738-1739</a><br>
>><br>
>> Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066<br>
>><br>
>> Costa Rica: <a href="tel:%2B506%207008%203964" target="_blank" value="+50670083964">+506 7008 3964</a><br>
>><br>
>> Our travel blog: <a href="http://www.paulandkatyexcellentadventure.blogspot.com" target="_blank">www.paulandkatyexcellentadventure.blogspot.com</a><br>
>><br>
>> My professional blog: <a href="http://www.paulrosenzweigesq.com" target="_blank">www.paulrosenzweigesq.com</a><br>
>><br>
>> Link to my PGP Key<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br></span><div><div class="h5">
>> From: <a href="mailto:wp4-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">wp4-bounces@icann.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:wp4-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">wp4-bounces@icann.org</a>] On Behalf Of Niels ten Oever<br>
>> Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 5:34 AM<br>
>> To: <a href="mailto:wp4@icann.org" target="_blank">wp4@icann.org</a><br>
>> Subject: Re: [Wp4] Board comments on Annex 6<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> Pardon me. This time with attachment. <br>
>><br>
>> Best,<br>
>><br>
>> Niels<br>
>><br>
>> On 18 December 2015 18:02:09 GMT+08:00, Niels ten Oever <<a href="mailto:lists@digitaldissidents.org" target="_blank">lists@digitaldissidents.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> Dear all, <br>
>>><br>
>>> By now you have probably all seen the comment of the board on the<br>
>>> proposed raft report, and especially annex 6. If not please find them<br>
>>> attached.<br>
>>><br>
>>> I have to say I was both dismayed and struck by surprise when I read<br>
>>> the comments, but I am very curious to learn what you think.<br>
>>><br>
>>> My main feeling was that we have already addressed all points that are<br>
>>> brought up, but again I am very curious to hear your opinion.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Finally. The biggest surprise came from the suggestion of the use of<br>
>>> the public interest instrument, which seems to be quite far fetched to<br>
>>> use in case of human rights. !<br>
>>><br>
>>> I can<br>
>>><br>
>>> imagine the headline: ICANN board<br>
>>> think human rights are against the public interest.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Looking forward to hear what you all think.<br>
>>><br>
>>> All the best,<br>
>>><br>
>>> Niels<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> .<br>
>><br>
>> -- <br>
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Wp4 mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Wp4@icann.org" target="_blank">Wp4@icann.org</a><br>
>> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> -- <br>
> Dr Paul Twomey<br>
> Managing Director<br>
> Argo P@cific <br>
><br>
> US Cell: <a href="tel:%2B1%20310%20279%202366" target="_blank" value="+13102792366">+1 310 279 2366</a><br>
> Aust M: <a href="tel:%2B61%20416%20238%20501" target="_blank" value="+61416238501">+61 416 238 501</a><br>
><br>
> <a href="http://www.argopacific.com" target="_blank">www.argopacific.com</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Wp4 mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Wp4@icann.org" target="_blank">Wp4@icann.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4</a><br>
><br>
</div></div><p></p>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Wp4 mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Wp4@icann.org">Wp4@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4</a><br>
<br></p></blockquote></div><br></div>