[council] Regarding data collected and the purpose of collecting data

[Philip Sheppard]

Bruce, Ross, Mawaki, Robin, fellow Councillors,
thank you for your responses to the proposed compromise wording.
The arguments within get to the heart of the disagreement.
I suspect both sides are making assumptions not held by the other side.

Bruce, you link to two key issues:
"The argument seems to be:
(1) Law enforcement need access to data for investigation
(2) The data must be made public for everyone in the world to see for this to happen
I can't understand this logic."

I agree. It is not my logic. I am NOT making the assertion in (2).
You assume that because a Registrar agreement TODAY requires public access, that is the
status quo upon which we are defining the purpose of WHOIS.
In other words you are defining purpose only in the context of the current means of access.

The footnote to the compromise definition did state "Note: This definition is explicitly
silent on questions of subsequent access to data or data publication".
In other words, the assumption in the compromise formulation is to separate the issues of
"purpose of data" and "access".

One side seems to say:
Registrar agreement is a given truth - now lets define purpose then discuss other issues.
The other side is saying:
Define purpose - discuss access - discuss other issues - implement in Registrar agreement as
required.

I suspect this lies at the root of the dissonance on both the TF and now Council.
It is a key dissonance to overcome.

A vote on Wednesday will not be a solution. Without resolving the above it will be a hollow
victory for either side.

Philip