[CPWG] [GTLD-WG] [registration-issues-wg] Next possible move related to GDPR
Tijani BEN JEMAA
tijani.benjemaa at topnet.tn
Fri Sep 7 09:08:35 UTC 2018
Carlton,
I may not sign on to all of their interests. But if some advance the ones I advocate then I will embrace them.
100% agree, and this is the balance I’m asking for
Jonathan
It is not about majority and minority. It’s the end users interest that At-Large should defend, and you asked me how. I answered your question in earlier mail, but I will make here more clear: We must protect the users from the cybercriminals and allow third party with legitimate purpose to access the non public data. This is for the interest of all end-users.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tijani BEN JEMAA
Executive Director
Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)
Phone: +216 98 330 114
+216 52 385 114
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Le 6 sept. 2018 à 23:37, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> If ever you get a chance to participate in a Review in the ICANN mold, I strongly recommend you take the time. All that required reading and argumentation does assist in concentrating the mind.
>
> My interpretation of the bye-law mandate for the ALAC to 'consider and provide advice....related to the interests of individual internet users" is and remains to advocate on behalf of the individual users. Take the ordinary OED meaning for that word.
>
> We have all decided that the term 'individual internet users' could be further unpacked to mean registrants and those who never will register a domain name. We cannot contest that the latter class would be billions compared to the tens of thousands of registrants.
>
> As At-large advocates, I'd assume we have permanent interests. When I'm in a contentious situation with advocates for many interests, I favour the idea that advances the greatest good to the greatest numbers.
>
> Alliances that progresses my interests come naturally to me. But to the extent that I advocate interests for public policy outcomes, I will always come down on the side that delivers the greatest good to the greatest numbers.
>
> This is situational. I have long recognized that in DNS matters, my objective of the greatest good delivered to the greatest numbers is often bound to third party interests. I may not sign on to all of their interests. But if some advance the ones I advocate then I will embrace them.
>
> Striking that balance is what detains me in this argument.
>
> -Carlton
>
> ==============================
> Carlton A Samuels
> Mobile: 876-818-1799
> Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround
> =============================
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 9:59 AM Jonathan Zuck <JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org <mailto:JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org>> wrote:
> Yes, yes. Sorry. I was just using the language of the thread and, in the process, distracted everyone from the point. Sigh. My POINT is that
>
>
> 1. The Minority are well represented by the Majority on the EPDP (registries, registrars, NCUC)
> 2. We are perhaps the only ones available (with only two people) to represent the Majority of end users.
>
> So while it is admirable for us to ALSO represent the minority (ie registrants) view because we seek “balance” in our position, it won’t result in balance on the EPDP. That’s all.
>
> From: Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa at topnet.tn <mailto:tijani.benjemaa at topnet.tn>>
> Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2018 5:50 AM
> To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com <mailto:ocl at gih.com>>
> Cc: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org <mailto:JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org>>; Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano at hotmail.com <mailto:roberto_gaetano at hotmail.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evanleibovitch at gmail.com <mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com>>; Holly Raiche <h.raiche at internode.on.net <mailto:h.raiche at internode.on.net>>; CPWG <cpwg at icann.org <mailto:cpwg at icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] Next possible move related to GDPR
>
> Exactly Olivier.
> And I do want At-Large and ALAC to remain far from this language of intolerant which is a value judgement by the way. I learned from my very early age that a value judgement is always wrong. None is intolerant; everybody is defending their own interests, and our interest as At-Large members is the public interest only (no commercial nor political interest).
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Tijani BEN JEMAA
> Executive Director
> Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)
> Phone: +216 98 330 114
> +216 52 385 114
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Le 6 sept. 2018 à 08:23, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com <mailto:ocl at gih.com><mailto:ocl at gih.com <mailto:ocl at gih.com>>> a écrit :
>
> 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,
>
> Olivier
>
> 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 <mailto:gtld-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org><mailto:gtld-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto: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 <mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com><mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com <mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com>>>
> *Cc:* Holly Raiche <h.raiche at internode.on.net <mailto:h.raiche at internode.on.net><mailto:h.raiche at internode.on.net <mailto:h.raiche at internode.on.net>>>; CPWG <cpwg at icann.org <mailto:cpwg at icann.org><mailto:cpwg at icann.org <mailto: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 <mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com>><mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com <mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com>
> <mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com <mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com>%3cmailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com <mailto:3cmailto%3Aevanleibovitch at gmail.com><http://gmail.com <http://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 <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 <mailto:h.raiche at internode.on.net>><mailto:h.raiche at internode.on.net <mailto: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 <mailto:3cmailto%3Ah.raiche at internode.on.net><http://internode.on.net <http://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 <mailto:bastiaan.goslings at ams-ix.net>><mailto:bastiaan.goslings at ams-ix.net <mailto: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 <mailto:3cmailto%3Abastiaan.goslings at ams-ix.net><http://ams-ix.net <http://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 <mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com>><mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com <mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com>
> <mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com <mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com>%3cmailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com <mailto:3cmailto%3Acarlton.samuels at gmail.com><http://gmail.com <http://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
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org <mailto:CPWG at icann.org><mailto:CPWG at icann.org <mailto:CPWG at icann.org>>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg>
> _______________________________________________
> GTLD-WG mailing list
> GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org><mailto:GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org>>
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg>
>
> Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org <mailto:CPWG at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg>
> _______________________________________________
> GTLD-WG mailing list
> GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg>
>
> Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20180907/1e1a6b3e/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the CPWG
mailing list