NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Milton L Mueller <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Milton L Mueller <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 21 Mar 2009 14:17:39 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (67 lines)
Cheryl,

If you want your questions to be discussed by the people on this list, please post them to this list. This is where the noncommercial organizations are, with the partial exception of CP80.  


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Non-Commercial User Constituency [mailto:NCUC-
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Cheryl Preston
> Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 6:39 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [NCUC-DISCUSS] questions on v6
> 
> Could you maybe just answer a couple of the substantive questions?  This
> is the link to the comments, concerns, and questions about NCUC version 6
> that have been posted on the charter discussion WiKi for nearly a week.
> https://st.icann.org/ncsg-commons/index.cgi?ncsg_structure
> 
> 
> 
> Cheryl B. Preston
> Edwin M. Thomas
> Professor of Law
> J. Reuben Clark Law School
> Brigham Young University
> 434 JRCB
> Provo, UT 84602
> (801) 422-2312
> [log in to unmask]
> 
> >>> Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> 3/20/2009 1:59:10 pm >>>
> So the "cybersafety" constituency proponents want to bring discussion
> to ICANN about "Internet safety" and when people start discussing
> what that means to them the discussion is called "inappropriate" by
> the proponents of the discussion?
> 
> Interesting way of bringing discussion of a subject to a community.
> 
> Robin
> 
> 
> On Mar 20, 2009, at 12:46 PM, David H Bailey wrote:
> 
> > This discussion is a bit tiresome, and more than a little bit
> > inappropriate.
> >
> > Can't we return to answering the questions posed last week in the
> > CSC response to version 6 of the NCUC proposal?
> >
> > DHB
> >
> > My position of online safety is that ICANN should only protect
> > against fraud and not free speech. Porn is a slippery slope. If we
> > were to take the Mormon position against porn, do we then take the
> > Catholic position against birth control or condom use? Do we take
> > down criticism of Islam? Do we protect children from "cults". ICANN
> > is not in the law enforcement business. We aren't here to police
> > the Internet - just make it work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2