[NCUC-DISCUSS] NomCom Review

[James Gannon]

And translating that into our current discussion, as I asked in my previous question, does the then mean that you don’t feel our colleagues across the GNSO are motivated by anything other than profit, that there is no common ground for us to find, or that we cannot support them or they cannot support us on issues of ‘decency and humanity’?


-J

From: Ncuc-discuss <ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org<mailto:ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org>> on behalf of Raoul Plommer <plommer at gmail.com<mailto:plommer at gmail.com>>
Date: Thursday 24 November 2016 at 20:20
To: Johan Helsingius <julf at julf.com<mailto:julf at julf.com>>
Cc: NCUC-discuss <ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org<mailto:ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>>
Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] NomCom Review

I'm not saying that businesses and humanity couldn't be combined or that businesses aren't able to do the right thing, every now and then, but when it comes to making a choice between the two, businesses will choose profit. I don't see any around that.

-Raoul

On 24 November 2016 at 21:55, Johan Helsingius <julf at julf.com<mailto:julf at julf.com>> wrote:
On 24-11-16 20:12, Raoul Plommer wrote:
> Our motivation is to keep internet humane and decent. Others' is to make
> as much money off it, as possible. While it might be a binary way of
> looking at things, it's a very clear line to me.

Raoul,

I am pretty sure you are familiar with my past history. :)

I have spent a heck of a lot of time fighting to make the
internet not so much a humane and decent but free and equal place,
while at the same time making money off (or through) it. The
same goes for some of my friends who founded EFF.

        Julf


_______________________________________________
Ncuc-discuss mailing list
Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org<mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20161124/cb656d37/attachment-0002.html>