[Public Comments] Call for Volunteers for NCSG Comment on Draft PTI FY21-24 Strategic Plan

[Tomslin Samme-Nlar]

Hi Raphael,

After the discussion you and Amr had, I re-read the document and now agree
the "risk" from privacy regulations doesn't seem to be PTI's and its
operations. If such a risk exists, it would be ICANN's not PTI.

Tomslin



On Sat, 23 May 2020 at 10:15, Raphael Beauregard-Lacroix <
rbeauregardlacroix at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Tomslin,
>
> Thanks for jumping in!
>
> If I understand you correctly, your point is that the risk evoked here is
> that of conflicting data protection rules? I agree that this is a risk
> somewhere out there, but I don't quite make the link between a hypothetical
> "hard" conflict of laws and the trust of the community in PTI; would you
> have some language to suggest, either to add or modify what is in the
> comment already?
>
> Have a nice day,
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 7:52 PM Tomslin Samme-Nlar <mesumbeslin at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the draft comment Raphael. Much appreciated!
>>
>> In the comment regarding "evolving  data  privacy  regulation  landscape
>> may  have  impacts  on  the  level  of transparency  for  the  IANA
>> registries,  which  may  erode  trust  and  accountability" being a risk
>> to  *Maintain  stakeholders’  trust  that  IANA  is  the  proper  home
>> for  enabling global  interoperability  through  unique  identifier
>> coordination,*
>> you wrote ".....to imply, for example, that data protection policies
>> (including those seemingly developed by the community in the context of the
>> Expedited Policy Development Process) may adversely affect “transparency,”
>> “trust,” or “accountability,” represents a value judgement. This is
>> problematic because PTI is not the final arbiter when it comes to the
>> implementation of those values into the policies; the community is."
>>
>> In my opinion, I think it is fair for PTI to put that as risk,
>> understanding that risk is a function of probability and impact. What they
>> are saying there in my view is the fact that there is potential for
>> different jurisdictional regulations to affect their ability to maintain
>> stakeholders' trust.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Tomslin
>>
>>
>> On Mon., 11 May 2020, 23:58 Raphael Beauregard-Lacroix, <
>> rbeauregardlacroix at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all
>>>
>>> I have drafted a comment. Comments, suggestions, edits are welcome. The
>>> strategic plan itself is quite short so feel free to have a look too!
>>>
>>> Let's give it a week here so that the PC also have ample time for
>>> review.
>>>
>>> Have a nice day,
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 7:34 PM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> PTI just published a public consultation on Draft PTI FY21-24 Strategic
>>>> Plan and asking for input. We commented previously on PTI budget and
>>>> operating plan and so it is important for us to review this strategic plan.
>>>> You can find here all the details here :
>>>> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-pti-fy21-24-strategic-plan-2020-04-20-en
>>>>
>>>> I created this google doc to be used during the drafting and accessible
>>>> to all in order to kick off the discussion and comments:
>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yjqC4fh-X9ISzJQWcxxwE75fHrNmnRuF93lCaweBjck/edit
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please let me offline if you want to volunteer to participate in
>>>> drafting the NCSG comment, join the drafting team and collaborating with
>>>> finance committee .
>>>>
>>>> You can find previous public comments submitted by NCSG in this wiki
>>>> page
>>>> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments+-+2020 and
>>>> listing those who drafted them or volunteered.
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Rafik Dammak
>>>>
>>>> NCSG Policy Committee Chair
>>>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20200524/7d00cf0c/attachment.htm>