Our blog post on this sorry incident.
http://www.internetgovernance.org/2014/06/07/icann-suppresses-a-privacy-advocates-dissent/
It includes the full statement of her dissent.
--MM
From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Stephanie Perrin
Sent: Saturday, June 7, 2014 12:10 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] [NCUC-DISCUSS] Fwd: [Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services] EWG Final Report is Now Posted
Thanks Bill, that would be great! I worked all day on that stupid dissent, trying to make it not seem like I am throwing out the whole report, and I explained my objections to them all over a period of some days. I also met the deadline,
and I had previously warned them it was going to be three pages. I cannot break confidence and forward emails, but I am afraid I perhaps should have anticipated the whole thing being thrown out, and provided options (if you don't like this, go with the shorter
version A, or B or C.) I suspect that objections might have been found to this as well, but it could have prevented the situation I find myself in now.
As many of you had said when I was named the only civil society/privacy voice in the EWG, it is really hard to balance with only one voice, particularly one such as me who is not working in the DNS industry, and who has not got the history of the battles, and
even (you wont catch me admitting this often, so write it down) being a non-attorney dealing with quite a few lawyers. I worked really really hard on this, and I got help from so many of you, especially Kathy and Tamir, when I asked questions, but it was
difficult when we were operating on Chatham House rules or the equivalent, to supplement my meagre knowledge and skill set.
I am also afraid I am now more or less voted off the island. I have my ticket for London, but I will not be surprised if I am not invited to speak or participate at upcoming webinars. I am getting (sob!) very lonely. :-) (joke, for the benefit of those who
do not know me). Anyway, I think we have the bones of a great conversation, and I want to emphasize that there are still many great things in that report. I think the EWG is correct in asserting that this report pays more attention to privacy than previous
efforts.
cheers steph
On 2014-06-07, 4:30 AM, William Drake wrote: