Public Comments - Revisions to ICANN Expected Standards of Behaviors

[Matthew Shears]

+ 1 Avri and Tatiana

On 6/1/2016 9:47 PM, Tatiana Tropina wrote:
> + 1 to Avri,
> I think this is my problem with this public comment draft (and I left 
> several comments about this in the doc). We do need more, but some of 
> the issues require more time for elaboration. I don't think we can 
> criticise ICANN for the fact that we haven't got more yet, when the 
> document we are commenting on says that the work is in progress.
> So agree with the positive comment that will say that it's good start 
> but there is definitely an important work to be done further.
> Cheers
> Tanya
>
> On 1 June 2016 at 19:24, avri doria <avri at apc.org 
> <mailto:avri at apc.org>> wrote:
>
>     On 31-May-16 15:58, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>     > From what I can read, I would not support the proposed policy.
>
>     I find myself agreeing with the comment that we will eventually need
>     something more.
>     And I think that RFC7704 is a good model.
>
>     But I think getting into that issue before we resolve wider
>     accountability issues WS2 (e.g. ombudsman, or SOAC accountabity) 
>     of the
>     CCWG-Accountabity is impracticable.    I would suggest a statement
>     that
>     said good start, lets go with this for now, and determine after WS2,
>     perhaps in next ATRT, whether more needs to be done. Some element
>     of the
>     issue could probably also feed into WS2 work.
>
>     avri
>
>
>
>     ---
>     This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>     https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>

-- 

Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project
Center for Democracy & Technology | cdt.org
E: mshears at cdt.org | T: +44.771.247.2987

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20160602/ee627f4e/attachment.htm>