RE: [registrars] Proposed Ballots

["Elana Broitman" <ebroitman@register.com>]

my ballot is meant to imply no predetermination of the outcome of recommendations about the nature or extent of the continuing availability of public Whois.  It is simply that the task force should review the issue.  if you have a better suggestion to achieve this, i'm happy to take a friendly amendment. 

-----Original Message-----
From: ross@tucows.com 
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 9:26 AM
To: Elana Broitman; tim@godaddy.com
Cc: stahura@enom.com; registrars@dnso.org
Subject: RE: [registrars] Proposed Ballots


> if Ross feels strongly about sending a more specific message...

Ross feels strongly about sending a less specific message. 

Again, your proposal implies that 

A) whois continues to be made available
B) that some users have more right to access the data than others
C) that some form of differentiated access be used to ensure that those
with more rights are treated differently than those with less rights.
D) requests that the privacy task force work to amend whois data
requirements per the above implications.

There are different ways of doing this that 

- may or may not require whois to continue to be used, 
- may or may not provide some classes of users with extra rights over
others and 
- may or may not require a differentiated access regime.

To go to this level of specificity at this early stage forecloses far
too many avenues of consideration to be reasonable.

As I mentioned, I'm quite busy today, but I will be putting an amendment
forward that clearly outlines what I am getting at.




                       -rwr




"There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an
idiot."
- Steven Wright

Get Blog... http://www.byte.org/