Re: [Internetgovtech] Transition to the web

[Dan York <[e-mail]>]

I find myself agreeing with Avri a bit here that I'm not entirely clear on what the issue is...

On Jul 10, 2014, at 7:24 AM, Avri Doria <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
 wrote:

BTW, I think I may have lost the thread on this.  The thing we are upset
about is a mailing list?

I get that ICANN shut down the [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> mailing list and asked everyone to move to a web discussion forum:

http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ianatransition/2014/001160.html

I get that they did this without a whole lot of public notice and without much discussion.   I further understand that when you go to that web discussion forum at:

http://discuss-stewardship.icann.org/t/welcome-to-the-discussion/47

you are agreeing by participating to abide by their Standards of Behavior[1], Privacy Policy[2], and Terms of Service[3]:

[1] https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-standards-2012-05-15-en
[2] https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/privacy-2012-12-21-en
[3] https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/tos-2014-06-13-en

I've scanned through all three and they all seem to be the typical kinds of documents you see associated with discussion forums and online sites.  Quite frankly, I'm glad to see they have these documents posted because it provides a framework that can be used to deal with trolls and other people who are being abusive.

>From some comments here on the list I gather there is a concern about one bullet item in the Standards of Behavior [1]:

• Protect the organization’s assets and ensure their efficient and effective use.

Which I personally took as "don't DDoS the website or otherwise do bad things to ICANN's infrastructure", but I gather others are perhaps interpreting as thinking of IANA as an ICANN "asset" and thereby biasing the discussion.

Is that the primary concern here?    If so, could we perhaps suggest to ICANN some clarifying language for this "Standards of Behavior" document to address the concerns?  Perhaps they would be fine making modifications to the document.

Additionally, would it not be reasonable to assume that if these documents apply to an ICANN-hosted web discussion forum they would *ALSO* apply to an ICANN-hosted mailing list?   Perhaps that was never explicitly stated in the sign-up page for the mailing list, but I could see a message from "ICANN staff" going out to the mailing list stating something along these lines. Many or most of us have probably been on lists where this is done from time to time by the list admins.  It seems to me to be a reasonable expectation.

If people are still unhappy with all three of these documents then perhaps, as Avri noted, discussions should take place on some of the other lists and forums that are out there on this issue.

Or am I missing something else here?

Thanks,
Dan