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!)

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.

Stephanie Perrin


On 2016-08-03 12:16, Schaefer, Brett wrote:
> 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 [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2016 11:47 AM
> To: Schaefer, Brett; [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: +1's and support
>
> On 08/03/2016 05:29 PM, Schaefer, Brett wrote:
>
>> 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.
>>
> 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
>