<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">I abstained from
expressing a view on the matter of HR in the bylaws, for
reasons which I discussed openly with all councillors and NCSG
participants on the CCWG for some time. (Anyone can be forgiven
for not noticing, as the traffic about the transition was
overwhelming in its volume and pace.) I was concerned that
the language was broad and would invite various parties to
campaign for content regulation at ICANN, something I am
strongly opposed to. However, it was a very difficult point
to explain concisely so I feared expressing dissent on HR in
the bylaws would be misconstrued as a lack of support for
human rights. IN my view, trying to make the point in public
at council would have sown confusion, and possibly been used
against my colleagues who are working so hard on the human
rights issues (notably you Niels!)</font></font></p>
<p><font size="+1">I think it is important to point out here that
disagreement on issues is very healthy. Niels and I come from
cultures where we can have frank and open disagreement without
taking matters personally. This is not the case in all
cultures, where open dissent is not considered respectful.
Somehow, we have to harmonize on ways of doing business in NCSG,
and I would like to stress that even if it is uncomfortable for
some folks, having a robust discussion with our peers is
necessary for this multi-stakeholder approach to work. I
personally don't like surprises, I expect my colleagues to share
information about their positions and activities.</font></p>
<p><font size="+1">Stephanie Perrin</font><br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2016-08-03 12:16, Schaefer, Brett
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1CD980839DEDF64B982D5ED56C0AF63D018C1CE239@THF-EXC-10.heritage.org"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Niels,
You seem to be taking this personally. Why?
We had several meetings in Morocco where went through each of the 11 recommendations and people voiced their concerns and we tried to reconcile a position. On some it was easy, others not so much. I don't recall if you attended or not.
Best,
Brett
Brett Schaefer
Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs
Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom
Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy
The Heritage Foundation
214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE
Washington, DC 20002
202-608-6097
heritage.org
-----Original Message-----
From: Niels ten Oever [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:lists@digitaldissidents.org">mailto:lists@digitaldissidents.org</a>]
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2016 11:47 AM
To: Schaefer, Brett; <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>
Subject: Re: +1's and support
On 08/03/2016 05:29 PM, Schaefer, Brett wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I disagree. The NCSG had various views on a number of issues in the
transition proposal. I actually though that the councilors did a
credible job of representing the diversity of views in the NCSG by
dividing their votes.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Hi Brett,
I probably have missed the discussion on human rights (and how it relates to North Korea) on the NCSG-list, could you point me to it?
Best,
Niels
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>