Hi Stephanie,

no worries, there will be discussion about the issue (a lot of discussion).
I am working to update the agenda for NCSG meeting and topics with the
board . we have to adapt to the new context.

for whois and other ongoing topics like accountability, we need to keep
following them, the challenge is how we to handle all these in parallel
because we cannot drop them.

Best Regards,

Rafik

2014-03-16 23:34 GMT+09:00 Stephanie Perrin <
[log in to unmask]>:

> +1 Avri.  Bad things happen in chaos, and there could be a lot of it as
> folks take this announcement for more than it is, and all the
> aforementioned crazy views get ventilated.  I am busy reading that law
> article on accountability that Zittrain referenced in his piece (thanks to
> whoever forwarded it) but I am a long long way from having an intelligent
> view on how this transition should occur, and what the what in transition
> to what means (apologies to non-english speakers for that one!).
> Is there time in Singapore to have a serious discussion/tutorial on this?
>  and does focusing on it put anything else at risk with respect to
> decision-making at Netmundial?  For instance, I have given up on thinking
> that anyone else will be focusing on decisions on the WHOIS makeover
> now...and some really un-good things could happen.
> cheers Stephanie
> On 2014-03-16, at 8:13 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
>
> > On 16-Mar-14 06:16, William Drake wrote:
> >>
> >> All the more reason for civil society actors to clear their throats and
> >> bring a little sanity….
> >>
> >
> > But views in so-called civil society are all over the map and match idea
> for idea both the crazy and the sane we see elsewhere.  Certainly lots of
> civil society actors are talking now, but we have widely divergent view
> points.
> >
> > I think that first we have to agree on some sane ideas.  I doubt we can
> find many we agree on, but if we find just a few basic ideas like "No the
> UN is not going to get IANA", we may be doing all we can do as a group.
> >
> > For example there are many proposals for the way forward.  The most
> famous being that offered by Brenden and Milton with lots of other
> contributions including one I made.  These are all very different and it
> will take a bit of work to distill from all of them the actual path
> forward.  While it looks like NCSG already endorsed the Brenden and Milton
> plan, I don't remember us doing so, though many here do endorse it. I don't
> happen to, though I do credit it for making me think about this seriously -
> I probably would not have made a contribution if I had not been so
> disturbed by their contribution. So I am grateful to is for showing me a
> path we should not follow.
> >
> > So yeah Civil Society needs to open its mouth, but what are we going to
> say?
> >
> > avri
>