[NCUC-DISCUSS] email in response to ICANN blogpost

[Seun Ojedeji]

On Jun 28, 2017 5:25 PM, "Niels ten Oever" <lists at digitaldissidents.org>
wrote:


On 06/28/2017 05:20 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am not a very active participant of the NCUC but but do follow
> happening and as a member I find this of interest to me. I read through
> the blog post and it was a good read; it seem quite educating and makes
> a lot of sense. I may understand why a certain service provider may not
> like the content but am not sure I understand the reason why NCUC is
> making a statement against the blog post.

Did you read the statement? Which argument did you not find compelling?


SO: I quote the following from the article:
"...... Tor serves many good purposes, but also attracts Dark Web users
wanting to keep their activities or marketplaces secret *and *
untraceable...."

It seem to me that the blog highlights the good and bad of a tool/service.
However your statement seem to indicate that the blog only highlights the
bad stuff. (ref: We sincerely hope you can correct the negative language in
your article)


>
> Overall, I know the views of members may not necessarily matter here (as
> it seem the EC makes the decision), i will suggest that you provide
> authoritative source for the definition of "dark web" and "deep web" in
> your statement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_web


SO: Good if that is authoritative then it may be good to include that as a
reference in the statement.

Regards



>
> Regards
>
> On Jun 28, 2017 4:59 PM, "Niels ten Oever" <lists at digitaldissidents.org
> <mailto:lists at digitaldissidents.org>> wrote:
>
>     Hi all,
>
>     This morning the ICANN VP for Security and IT published a blogpost
which
>     appeared in this mornings newsletter, as well as on ICANNs website
>     concerning the Dark Web.
>
>     https://www.icann.org/news/blog/the-dark-web-the-land-of-hi
dden-services
>     <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/the-dark-web-the-land-of-h
idden-services>
>
>     A number of us got together and drafted an email to the author to give
>     him an opportunity to correct the falsehoods that are stated in the
>     blog.
>
>     We have two options:
>
>     1. Send the letter on behalf of the NCUC
>     2. Sign the letter in your personal capacities.
>
>     Let's discuss it here, but feel free to already sign (as a fallback
>     option).
>
>     You can find the draft letter here:
>
>     https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xB19ycvHPH9TagLjEiAnOpb
kLbx9jdD49y3CAKVLoac/edit
>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xB19ycvHPH9TagLjEiAnOp
bkLbx9jdD49y3CAKVLoac/edit>
>
>     Best,
>
>     Niels
>
>     --
>     Niels ten Oever
>     Head of Digital
>
>     Article 19
>     www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
>
>     PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
>                          678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
>     _______________________________________________
>     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
>     <http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss>
>

--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital

Article 19
www.article19.org

PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
                     678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20170628/11f37500/attachment-0002.html>