On Tue, 11 Jun 2019, 15:27 Mike Silber, <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Ish > > > On 11 Jun 2019, at 14:08, Ish Sookun <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Right. I will seek the advice of the Data Protection Office on this > matter. > > > I look forward to their response. > >> > >> > > > > I quote from > https://afrinic.net/ast/pdf/2019-minutes/20190305-minutes.pdf > > > > « SM recalled that the Board collectively agreed to take the AGMM > > matter to Court and there was no decision about disclosing the > > personal data to the community. It was just a matter of when to > > disclose the information and what to disclose. It is not because > > the document is public, that we can disclose to the public mailing > > list. » > > > > Am I reading the wrong or inaccurate minutes? > > You will note reference in the quote above to "personal data” and then > “information” and then the fact that “the document is public”. The minutes > do not indicate the difference between these terms and are imprecise. > > For that reason I questioned whether they are perhaps inaccurate. Are you > able to surmise a logical reading of the above? In which case - please > share it and the basis on which you draw such conclusion. > There is precedence for redacting public documents for various reasons before publishing them. In this case, there seemed to be a concern of data protection in light of the local data protection laws. Cheers Noah
_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
