RE: [registrars] Proposed Ballots

["Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>]

> I think the motion is fairly open ended on implementation. It 
> wouldn't even require port 43 to remain in the mix. It is 
> simply about restricting access, in some manner, to those who 
> need to know.

Perhaps, but it also presumes that Whois should be perpetuated, that
differentiated access is desirable and that law enforcement and
intellectual property interests require special treatment by registrars.
All of this adds up to additional costs without a proper exploration of
the alternatives. 

At the very least the motion should be amended to simply indicate
support for an examination of the privacy implications of the existing
whois policy and promote a discussion amongst registrars of proposals
that might address the problems we perceive as being pressing.

I want to see the datamining stop just as much as anyone - we have the
second most to lose. I'm simply advocating a more informed and judicious
approach to developing our position.

-rwr