[Wp4] Board comments on Annex 6

[Seun Ojedeji]

On Dec 18, 2015 23:18, "Paul Twomey" <paul.twomey at argopacific.com> wrote:
>
>
> 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)
>

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.

Regards
> Paul Twomey
>
>
>
> On 12/19/15 1:13 AM, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>>
>> To say I am disappointed in the Board is to understate the matter.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>>
>> Paul Rosenzweig
>>
>> Paul.rosenzweig at gmail.com
>>
>> +1 (202) 329-9650
>>
>> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
>>
>> Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066
>>
>> Costa Rica: +506 7008 3964
>>
>> Our travel blog: www.paulandkatyexcellentadventure.blogspot.com
>>
>> My professional blog: www.paulrosenzweigesq.com
>>
>> Link to my PGP Key
>>
>>
>>
>> From: wp4-bounces at icann.org [mailto:wp4-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of
Niels ten Oever
>> Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 5:34 AM
>> To: wp4 at icann.org
>> Subject: Re: [Wp4] Board comments on Annex 6
>>
>>
>>
>> Pardon me. This time with attachment.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Niels
>>
>> On 18 December 2015 18:02:09 GMT+08:00, Niels ten Oever <
lists at digitaldissidents.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> By now you have probably all seen the comment of the board on the
>>> proposed raft report, and especially annex 6. If not please find them
>>> attached.
>>>
>>> I have to say I was both dismayed and struck by surprise when I read
>>> the comments, but I am very curious to learn what you think.
>>>
>>> My main feeling was that we have already addressed all points that are
>>> brought up, but again I am very curious to hear your opinion.
>>>
>>> Finally. The biggest surprise came from the suggestion of the use of
>>> the public interest instrument, which seems to be quite far fetched to
>>> use in case of human rights. !
>>>
>>>  I can
>>>
>>> imagine the headline: ICANN board
>>> think human rights are against the public interest.
>>>
>>> Looking forward to hear what you all think.
>>>
>>> All the best,
>>>
>>> Niels
>>>
>>>
>>> .
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wp4 mailing list
>> Wp4 at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>
>
> --
> Dr Paul Twomey
> Managing Director
> Argo P at cific
>
> US Cell: +1 310 279 2366
> Aust M: +61 416 238 501
>
> www.argopacific.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wp4 mailing list
> Wp4 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp4/attachments/20151219/6c52226d/attachment.html>