[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] a suggestion for "purpose in detail"

[John Bambenek]

And part of the "if so" includes whether the individual chooses to protect it in some free privacy regime. It's the same question. 

Its why Twitter can exist. If you post publicly knowing you are doing so and having a true choice, then privacy issues become greatly reduced. 

Here we have (1) you MUST provide "all this stuff" and (2) you MUST pay extra or we broadcast it to the world. 

It isn't an ancillary question. Its the fundamental one. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 21, 2017, at 13:55, "ajs at anvilwalrusden.com" <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 01:22:18PM -0500, John Bambenek wrote:
>> I think we should also discuss at a higher level that if privacy services were free from the registrars if that would largely resolve all of this. 
> 
> I don't see how.  The experts last week were quite clear that the
> first question is about collection, and our PDP is chartered to talk
> about that too, so we have to discuss whether some of this data should
> be collected at all, and if so by whom.
> 
> A
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg