My last comment here (from the balmy shores of Dakar) is:

Can we close the door on the "thin" data discussion. Stephanie is right when she says deciding what to collect is difference from deciding what to disclose. The purpose of that thin data example is that it violates none of the principles being discussed here.

As for what to collect, data is never proposed for collection without some purpose, be that good, bad, legal or illegal. We have had analogies (garbage can lids), example (health data) etc.. Should we get back to simply listing the principles (legal, ethical, etc.) that should be considered when deciding what to collect, then later on get into the principles that should govern what should be disclosed and under what conditions?

Sam

On 2017-01-25 11:56 AM, Stephanie Perrin wrote:

Sorry, this discussion is important. Your example proves my point. What you show below is a disclosure. It is a disclosure of a limited set of data. we are not supposed to be talking about disclosure at this point in our proceedings. I leave it to the experts on whether this is "thin" in the sense of the thick transition discussion, I really don't know because we are focused on gTLD policy here. My point is this is a disclosure. We do not "collect" thin data per se, we collect a whole mess of mandatory data elements, as per the RAA. Then we generate a whole mess as part of activating and making real the domain's existence. Then we share (release) a small subset.

So talking about collecting thin data is misleading in my view. Purpose of disclosing it is what we are in fact talking about. Calling it a purpose for collection opens the barn door.

Stephanie