[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ga] Message from the Chair - List Rules
>Since you chose to impose censorship, I chose to leave this group.
While I am not particularly influenced by insults and menaces by the
(few) people that indulge in this childish practice, I am particularly
upset by your decision.
First of all, because it will deprive the GA of a voice that brings a
different POV, that is very useful for the good health of the debate.
But most important, because it comes on a difference of opinion about a
subject that is very important for me: freedom of expression.
The difference of opinion is about where to draw the line.
As I said before, I read with much interest your postings, as well as
those of many others, like Dan and Ellen. We seldom agree. I even recall
that I have been very critical of some of the positions of the BWG, but
never the idea of limiting the freedom of speech of the people like you
has crossed my mind. Moreover, I would fight for your right to express
your opinions (that I don't share), and I told you in private postings
that I think that your presence in the ICANN BoD would be beneficial. In
fact, I even supported your nomination as DNSO candidate (but I think
that your role is more the one of an At-Large Director).
Why am I telling you this? Because I believe, and here comes the
disagreement, that at a certain point you have to draw the line between
the expression of alternative positions on issues at hand, and
expression of nothing, that are even sidetracking the debate, and
therefore ultimately reducing the possibility for ideas and proposals
that are alternative to the ones of the "ruling powers".
My point is that while there is absolutely no doubt that "censorship" of
ideas should never have citizenship here (or anywhere else, for this
matter), the enforcement of rules of behaviour is a different ball game.
Combine this with the fact that who uses abusive language or multiple
identities writes much, but sais nothing, and you have the reason for
the decision of providing a monitored list for those who cannot (or do
not want) to bother in "filtering". For the others, a "full" list,
including even postings from non-members, is available.
The inconditionals of the "no monitoring" can easily subscribe to the
full list, and do their own filtering. How can this possibly be called
One last question.
You claim that the GA has little power vs. the NC, and that the NC has
little power vs. ICANN, and so on (see ref. below):
>Not that I'm leaving a body that has any power - the General Assembly
>powerless and ignorred by the Names Council of the DNSO. And the Names
>Council is ignorred by the ICANN board. And the ICANN board is
>bypassed by ICANN's executive officers.
Do you *really* think that the best way to increase the power of the GA
is to quit the boat now?