Preston Responds On ICANN CyberSafety Constituency

An anonymous reader writes "After coverage here on Slashdot and elsewhere, Cheryl Preston has responded. She says that 'some netizens have missed the mark by turning the rather hum-drum constituency formation issue into a rash of (admittedly sometimes quite humorous) charges, allegations, and ad hominem attacks. I can only wish that I had control of some global Mormon conspiracy network, that this were a money-making proposition, and that my powers of persuasion could possibly move ICANN to adopt a content regulatory system...in reality, the CyberSafety constituency is interested in many current GNSO issues, such as Fast Flux Hosting (FFH); the development of a Registrants' Rights Charter; the gathering of identity information on WHOIS; and public order issues with the granting of new Top Level Domain names, to name a few.'"

Comments

"Public order issues"?

[John Hasler]

What the hell are "public order issues"?

Some Are Uncomfortable With The Truth

[Chabil Ha']

Coming from an ultra-conservative background myself, I still find the whole notion of Internet regulation and censorship to be a bit laughable. The Internet is an inherently 'dangerous' place. The 'Net is a portal into the ethos of human society. If you want to know the collective wisdom, foolishness, virtues, and vices of humanity, it's all there--unedited, uncensored, uncut. Some people find that uncomfortable because it lays bare the core of who we really are. And if you don't like that, then maybe the Internet is not for you. If we're really interested in an open and free (libre) society, the Internet gives everyone the best chance to be heard and be seen--and the side of that open coin is hearing and seeing things that you don't necessarily agree with or condone.

Re:Some Are Uncomfortable With The Truth

[Chabil Ha']

You miss the point of what I was trying to say. The Internet is us. Though you choose to focus on the negative aspects of who we are, worms, popups, piracy, agenda-driven corruption, scams, spam, primal absurdity, and porn are a part of who we are.

If you want a good read, here's God's Debris, a thought experiment from Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert.

Re:Some Are Uncomfortable With The Truth

[Chabil Ha']

This behaviour is "not the core of who they are" but rather a projection in which they choose to indulge because of loosened inhibitions.

But I would argue that who we are is just that--what kind of person are we when we think no one is looking (or hiding behind a pseudonym)? Be honest with yourself--you might discover something interesting. Some are less hypocritical than that, though, and behave the way they do regardless of who might know.

Re:Some Are Uncomfortable With The Truth

[frangalista]

I agree that we all have tendencies and drives that lead toward damaging behaviour. Civilisation is built on the realisation that, in order to live in the world, we need to control those emotions and passions. Yes, they are a part of us. However, as soon as I make the choice to behave in a civilised manner, that choice becomes as much a part of me as these "baser instincts". I don't believe that it is hypocritical at all to strive to be better than what I am. I can recognise my wretched behaviour and I can strive to rectify it.

Bad ideas, obfuscated, are still bad ideas

[damn_registrars]

They mention it only in passing in that article, but the new gTLDs-for-sale are a colossally bad idea. Registrar compliance (or lack thereof) is terrible right now; it is too easy to find a shoddy registrar who will accept completely bogus registration data for your latest spamming/phishing/insert-other-dubious-activity-here activity. But at least the current system of TLDs has some miniscule shred of accountability. If people can start purchasing their own TLDs - say .viagara for example - they can set all the rules for registrar and registration requirements.

At which point our last hope to track down the source of the newest waves of spam have gone out the window, as there will be nothing meaningful to track. And as those TLDs won't be in any way regulated by ICANN - or anyone else not in it just for money - there will be no one to turn to when the WHOIS records are meaningless or empty.