<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: Discussion of Cybersafety Constituency</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'>Dear Cheryl,<BR>
<BR>
I never meant to condemn your beliefs, you as a person or your scholarly work and I apologize if I gave that impressions. However, my email reflects only my concern with the way, over the past year at least, you seem to try to put forward certain issues and disrupt the democratic structure of NCUC. For a lot of the issues that you have brought to the group, many members have expressed their opinion often disagreeing with what you stand for, yet again you either choose to disregard any consensus-based decisions and, instead, proceed directly to ICANN, sidestepping this way the work and effort of many or you choose to proceed to opinions where you seem to be making academic statements that, to me at least, are unprofessional and overly subjective ( <a href="http://www.domainnews.com/en/general/internet-porn-icann-and-families-a-call-to-action.html">http://www.domainnews.com/en/general/internet-porn-icann-and-families-a-call-to-action.html</a>). <BR>
So please do not tell me that I am unprofessional because I am not the one who is not complying with the democratic principles of majority opinion or who is disrupting the group, which at the end of the day seeks to balance out the interests of non-commercial users and have managed to do so quite well especially in an unwelcoming environment as ICANN. For the past year, your input has been only limited to certain issues that reflect your agenda – where is your input on the new gTLD plan or the WHOIS debate? If you are interested, as you are advocating, in issues of safety on the Internet, then you should actually consider these issues and not only focusing on issues directly related to your agenda.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Konstantinos<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 21/03/2009 07:03, "Cheryl Preston" <<a href="prestonc@LAWGATE.BYU.EDU">prestonc@LAWGATE.BYU.EDU</a>> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Consolas, Courier New, Courier"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:10pt'>Dear Konstantinos,<BR>
<BR>
With regards to your recent email (below):<BR>
<BR>
I am a member of the GigaNet new members committee of which you are<BR>
chair. Does that mean that member admission to GigaNet will be run with<BR>
a "CP80 or Mormon agenda," where I will succeed with an "imposition of<BR>
religious beliefs"?<BR>
<BR>
You say: "We always have to bear in mind that these views only<BR>
represent a small fraction of the constituency and are designed to deal<BR>
with issues under a different, more religious, perspective . . ." Who<BR>
do you think is the small fraction? Do you know any other constituency<BR>
members other than Prof. Clifford and I?<BR>
<BR>
You and I are colleagues in GigaNet. We have met. You can read the<BR>
breadth of my scholarly work, although you obviously not know nothing<BR>
about me as a person. I have been a respected professional in law firms<BR>
and taught law both at the University of Utah and BYU over a 30 year<BR>
career.<BR>
<BR>
I think your statements are unbecoming a professional. Is this kind of<BR>
behavior that is condoned in an academic society? In the GigaNet<BR>
academic society?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Cheryl B. Preston<BR>
Edwin M. Thomas<BR>
Professor of Law<BR>
J. Reuben Clark Law School<BR>
Brigham Young University<BR>
434 JRCB<BR>
Provo, UT 84602<BR>
(801) 422-2312<BR>
<a href="prestonc@lawgate.byu.edu">prestonc@lawgate.byu.edu</a><BR>
<BR>
>>> Konstantinos Komaitis <<a href="k.komaitis@STRATH.AC.UK">k.komaitis@STRATH.AC.UK</a>> 3/20/2009 5:05 am<BR>
>>><BR>
I am also very much in favor of promoting issues of online and<BR>
individual<BR>
safety, however, my main concern is that if such issues are promoted<BR>
under<BR>
the CP80 or the Mormon agenda only certain views will be expressed<BR>
that<BR>
reflect the culture and tradition of such groups. Everybody,<BR>
irrespective of<BR>
religious or personal beliefs, wants to see an Internet safe and<BR>
secure;<BR>
however, the means through which this will be achieved varies amongst<BR>
the<BR>
members of the constituency and this is not to say that these views<BR>
cannot<BR>
be expressed. However, we always have to bear in mind that these views<BR>
only<BR>
represent a small fraction of the constituency and are designed to deal<BR>
with<BR>
issues under a different, more religious, perspective that does not<BR>
necessarily comply with everybody¹s idea of how safety online is to be<BR>
achieved. To me this sounds like an imposition of religious beliefs<BR>
rather<BR>
than a genuine concern about the issues discussed.<BR>
<BR>
Konstantinos<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 19/03/2009 22:52, "Jeremy Geigle" <<a href="JGeigle@JACKSONWHITELAW.COM">JGeigle@JACKSONWHITELAW.COM</a>><BR>
wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Hear, hear Professor Clifford, your comments are well-taken.<BR>
><BR>
> I also agree with the need to look broadly at individual safety<BR>
online -<BR>
> including identity theft, destruction of resources, child safety,<BR>
individual<BR>
> choice/control.<BR>
><BR>
> Jeremy S. Geigle<BR>
> President AZFC<BR>
> JD/MBA<BR>
><BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: Non-Commercial User Constituency<BR>
[<a href="mailto:NCUC-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">mailto:NCUC-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>]<BR>
> On Behalf Of Ralph D. Clifford<BR>
> Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 2:49 PM<BR>
> To: <a href="NCUC-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCUC-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a><BR>
> Subject: Discussion of Cybersafety Constituency<BR>
><BR>
> First the background: I am not a member of CP80. I am not a Mormon. I<BR>
have no<BR>
> connections to either group of any kind and, before today, I had<BR>
never heard<BR>
> of Mr. Yarro. Personally, I don't see pornography as a big problem in<BR>
society.<BR>
> Despite this, I am a member of the cybersafety constituency because<BR>
it is not<BR>
> the one-issue group that some seem to want to make it; instead, it is<BR>
a group<BR>
> of people who are concerned that ICANN's decision-making often<BR>
ignores issues<BR>
> of individual safety including such things as identity theft,<BR>
destruction of<BR>
> computer resources, etc. And yes, some others in the group are<BR>
concerned with<BR>
> the distribution of porn.<BR>
><BR>
> Second, a comment: Today's "discussion" has been outrageous. The only<BR>
thing it<BR>
> reminds me of are the flame wars that used to erupt on Usenet<BR>
(although no one<BR>
> has called someone else a Nazi, yet, just implied it). Unfortunately,<BR>
that<BR>
> seems to be the norm in this discussion group. Almost always, ideas<BR>
are not<BR>
> exchanged; accusations of conspiracy are. This is too bad as it<BR>
certainly<BR>
> discourages the openness that ICANN allegedly wants.<BR>
><BR>
> --<BR>
> Ralph D. Clifford<BR>
> Professor of Law<BR>
> S. New England School of Law<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
--<BR>
Dr. Konstantinos Komaitis,<BR>
Lecturer in Law,<BR>
GigaNet Membership Chair,<BR>
University of Strathclyde,<BR>
The Lord Hope Building,<BR>
141 St. James Road,<BR>
Glasgow, G4 0LT,<BR>
UK<BR>
tel: +44 (0)141 548 4306<BR>
email: <a href="k.komaitis@strath.ac.uk">k.komaitis@strath.ac.uk</a><BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Consolas, Courier New, Courier"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:10pt'><BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'>-- <BR>
Dr. Konstantinos Komaitis,<BR>
Lecturer in Law,<BR>
GigaNet Membership Chair,<BR>
University of Strathclyde,<BR>
The Lord Hope Building,<BR>
141 St. James Road,<BR>
Glasgow, G4 0LT,<BR>
UK<BR>
tel: +44 (0)141 548 4306<BR>
email: <a href="k.komaitis@strath.ac.uk">k.komaitis@strath.ac.uk</a> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT>
</BODY>
</HTML>