Evan, While I agree with you that 98% constitutes rough consensus I also believe that Alan was raising a problem that is not just about numbers and percentages but about type of stakeholders. If the 2% represents a different “category” of stakeholders I believe that their needs should be taken into account. After all, the contracted parties are even less, in pure numbers, than the registrants, nevertheless they have a strong voice in the process. Cheers, Roberto
On 03.09.2018, at 23:52, Evan Leibovitch <evanleibovitch@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 3, 2018, 3:38 PM Alan Greenberg, <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
Let us hypothesize that there are 4 billion users and 2% of them are gTLD registrants (80,000,000). Does that mean that Hadia and I should push strongly for law enforcement and cybersecurity professionals to have good access most of the time, but for 2% of the time we strongly support those who want to minimize their access because they do not believe that there is sufficient justification to infringe on registrant privacy (ie the "privacy fetishists ;-) )?
If that is the split, 98 to 2... Given what I originally said, that clearly falls under "rough consensus", if the determination is clear on what the non-registrant end user PoV is.
Consensus does not demand unanimity. Never did. But that balance is pretty overwhelming.
That will not give us much credibility!
I disagree. Credibility is based on honesty and sincerity, not dogmatism. The expectation that the global end user community speaks with a monolithic single viewpoint is what isn't credible.
Cheers, Evan _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs