<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
<div>
<div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Hi Corinne,</font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Looks in much better shape, I made some small suggestions on the google doc.</font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">-James</font></div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
<div id="MAC_OUTLOOK_SIGNATURE"></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
<br>
</div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
<div style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:12pt; text-align:left; color:black; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt">
<span style="font-weight:bold">From: </span>NCSG-Discuss <<a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>> on behalf of Corinne Cath <<a href="mailto:corinnecath@GMAIL.COM">corinnecath@GMAIL.COM</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Reply-To: </span>Corinne Cath <<a href="mailto:corinnecath@GMAIL.COM">corinnecath@GMAIL.COM</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span>Wednesday 15 June 2016 at 16:01<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span>"<a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>" <<a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span>Re: Public Comments - Revisions to ICANN Expected Standards of Behaviors<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Dear all,<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I trust this email finds you well. I redrafted the letter on the basis of the discussion on the list and on the etherpad.
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">You can find it here on the google doc:
<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Kb-LVkR-JSEA00aiHej5lNWWB49ASU8pNuxoSGaD85g/edit">
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Kb-LVkR-JSEA00aiHej5lNWWB49ASU8pNuxoSGaD85g/edit</a><br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Please have a look, I hope with these changes we can adopt it as a NCSG public comment.
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Best,<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Corinne<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Niels ten Oever <span dir="ltr">
<<a href="mailto:lists@digitaldissidents.org" target="_blank">lists@digitaldissidents.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Dear Ayden,<br>
<span class=""><br>
On 06/03/2016 08:13 PM, Ayden Férdeline wrote:<br>
> I tried responding on the pad, but it will not save my comments.<br>
><br>
> I don't have a hard objection to the NCSG responding to this<br>
> consultation – indeed, I believe we should be submitting responses<br>
> whenever we are given the opportunity – but the drafted response is not<br>
> one that I can support.<br>
><br>
> What I see in the proposed revisions to the Expected Standards of<br>
> Behaviour is a prime example of how you can change policy without<br>
> changing practice (perhaps changing policy can even be a way of not<br>
> changing practice? or maybe I shouldn't be so cynical).<br>
<br>
</span>Don't the two go hand in hand?<br>
<span class=""><br>
> Brett hit the<br>
> nail on the head – what are the consequences for violating these<br>
> Standards?<br>
<br>
</span>Am now completely unclear whether you would like enforcement (as Brett<br>
argued), or not.<br>
<span class=""><br>
> And as Dorothy said, let's have some clarity and define these<br>
> terms, because Marrakesh showed us that definitions of harassment can<br>
> vary significantly from person to person.<br>
><br>
> If I understand the point that Avri raised, that we would be best placed<br>
> considering this issue in depth once we have more clarity around Work<br>
> Stream 2, then I agree – but what choice did the Board have? 'We' asked<br>
> that they institute changes immediately. Like cement we asked that<br>
> changes be set before they harden. The problems and the complexities<br>
> will not be clear immediately. Let us instead take our time and<br>
> thoughtfully and collaboratively confront sexual harassment.<br>
<br>
</span>Are you saying that earlier contributions have not been thoughtful?<br>
<span class=""><br>
><br>
> This is essential because I have heard some NCSG members speak of sexual<br>
> harassment as though it is an organisational problem, which in my view<br>
> it isn't. It is possibly one of community culture, but if we accept<br>
> that, we can't just push this back to ICANN to somehow deal with. I<br>
> don't want a return to the Victorian moral panic of the 1880s, I don't<br>
> want ICANN inhibiting anyone's free speech to satisfy a few special<br>
> interests.<br>
<br>
</span>I am very surprised that you relate Victorian moral panic to<br>
anti-harassment policy. Perhaps you should try to have a look at the<br>
issue from a non-male perspective.<br>
<br>
Secondly, I don't think anti-harassment is not a in the interest of a few.<br>
<span class=""><br>
> No 'conference harassment policy' is going to have meaningful<br>
> community buy-in unless culture changes.<br>
<br>
</span>Chicken - egg, but we already discussed this point above.<br>
<span class=""><br>
> We need to tread carefully and<br>
> think about how we want this to happen: personally, I'd be uncomfortable<br>
> with the idea of a working group of self-appointed members working to<br>
> impose their moral norms over the entire community.<br>
><br>
> There is no need to rush through any changes to policy ahead of<br>
> Helsinki. If anything, I feel like WE are more at fault here than ICANN<br>
> as an organisation is. WE are not respecting the processes already in<br>
> place to deal with sexual harassment, such as making contact and<br>
> collaborating with the Ombudsman. WE have not been standing true to our<br>
> principles of advocating for privacy by naming on public listservs the<br>
> names of alleged perpetrators. When we behave in the manner that we have<br>
> and threaten the organisation's reputation, the only reasonable response<br>
> from ICANN can be one of damage limitation, which gets us nowhere.<br>
><br>
<br>
</span>Funny that you talk about everything here, except victims.<br>
<span class=""><br>
> ICANN has been very responsive to the concerns raised by the community,<br>
> and so in our response to this consultation, I would suggest that we<br>
> praise the Board in the strongest terms for making revisions to the<br>
> Expected Standards of Behaviour a matter of priority, but ask that we be<br>
> given more time as a community to think about what changes we really<br>
> want to see. After all, a harassment policy should not become a means<br>
> for some to harass others with differing perspectives.<br>
><br>
> Ayden<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
</span><span class="">> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 11:54 AM, Matthew Shears <a href="mailto:mshears@CDT.ORG">
mshears@CDT.ORG</a><br>
</span>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:mshears@CDT.ORG">mshears@CDT.ORG</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> __ + 1 Avri and Tatiana<br>
<span class="">><br>
> On 6/1/2016 9:47 PM, Tatiana Tropina wrote:<br>
>> + 1 to Avri,<br>
>> I think this is my problem with this public comment draft (and I<br>
>> left several comments about this in the doc). We do need more, but<br>
>> some of the issues require more time for elaboration. I don't<br>
>> think we can criticise ICANN for the fact that we haven't got more<br>
>> yet, when the document we are commenting on says that the work is<br>
>> in progress.<br>
>> So agree with the positive comment that will say that it's good<br>
>> start but there is definitely an important work to be done further.<br>
>> Cheers<br>
>> Tanya<br>
>><br>
>> On 1 June 2016 at 19:24, avri doria <<a href="mailto:avri@apc.org">avri@apc.org</a><br>
</span>
<div>
<div class="h5">>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:avri@apc.org">avri@apc.org</a>>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> On 31-May-16 15:58, Mueller, Milton L wrote:<br>
>> > From what I can read, I would not support the proposed policy.<br>
>><br>
>> I find myself agreeing with the comment that we will<br>
>> eventually need<br>
>> something more.<br>
>> And I think that RFC7704 is a good model.<br>
>><br>
>> But I think getting into that issue before we resolve wider<br>
>> accountability issues WS2 (e.g. ombudsman, or SOAC<br>
>> accountabity) of the<br>
>> CCWG-Accountabity is impracticable. I would suggest a<br>
>> statement that<br>
>> said good start, lets go with this for now, and determine<br>
>> after WS2,<br>
>> perhaps in next ATRT, whether more needs to be done. Some<br>
>> element of the<br>
>> issue could probably also feed into WS2 work.<br>
>><br>
>> avri<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ---<br>
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus<br>
>> software.<br>
>> <a href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.avast.com/antivirus</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
><br>
> --<br>
><br>
> Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project<br>
> Center for Democracy & Technology | <a href="http://cdt.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">
cdt.org</a><br>
</div>
</div>
> E: <a href="mailto:mshears@cdt.org">mshears@cdt.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:mshears@cdt.org">mshears@cdt.org</a>> | T:
<a href="tel:%2B44.771.247.2987" value="+447712472987">+44.771.247.2987</a><br>
<span class="">><br>
><br>
><br>
> Ayden Férdeline<br>
> Statement of Interest<br>
</span>> <<a href="https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Ayden+F%C3%A9rdeline+SOI" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Ayden+Férdeline+SOI</a>><br>
<div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5"><br>
--<br>
Niels ten Oever<br>
Head of Digital<br>
<br>
Article 19<br>
<a href="http://www.article19.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">www.article19.org</a><br>
<br>
PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4<br>
678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
<div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Corinne J.N. Cath </span>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</span>
</body>
</html>