Re: [ga] Are the Falkland Islands and Bermuda in Europe?

[Marc Schneiders <marc@fuchsia.bijt.net>]

On Sun, 8 Jun 2003, at 19:34 [=GMT+0200], Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
> On 8 Jun 2003 at 16:24, Marc Schneiders wrote:
>
> > The 5 regions used by ICANN to ascertain geographical representation have
> > made me uncomfortable for several reasons. One of these is that they are
> > not nearly of equal size in whatever way you measure that size
> > (inhabitants, internet users, size of territory).
>
> Dear Marc, it is not always size that matters.

As a theologian by trade I was convinced of that the first 30 years of my
life. And I still see why it is nice to think so. People from other
disciplines, however, have come up with the idea of democracy, one woman,
one vote, two million people, two million votes. Do you want to give that
up?

> > Asia-Pacific			3798		15,568
> > Africa                           840		11,698
> > Europa				 728		 8,875
> > Latin America-Caribbean		 531		 7,964
> > North America			 319		 7,699
> >
> > (Source: http://www.prb.org/pdf/WorldPopulationDS02_Eng.pdf)
>
> If you choose population as the criteria, half of the board should be determined
> by Asia pacific.

"It is not always size that matters."

The point I tried to make (but I apparently failed): We need more than
cosmetic changes to the regions. You seem to support that.

> > Some may find it important to take the number of internet users into
> > account. Here are some data (for what they are worth):
> >
> > Europe          190
> > Asia/Pacific    187
> > US/Canada       183
> > Latin America   33
> > Africa          6
> > Middle East     5
> >
> > (Source: http://www.nua.ie/surveys/how_many_online/)
> >
> > This would suggest 3 regions not 5:
> >
> > America                         216
> > Europe, Africa                  196
> > Asia/Pacific/Middle East        192
>
> Your proposal implies a lack of independent representation for Africa and the
> Middle East as well.

Not at all. For in ICANN the regions do not elect board members or members
of the SO councils. They are merely taken into account by those who do.
ALAC is different, I know, but there 3 regions with 3 reps from each
region might lead to more diversity that 5 with 2.

> In this sense, your model reproduces the digital divide.

Another failure perhaps on my part. I thought I had transcended it. The
divisions are not along the lines of the digital divide at all.

> It also implies that the cut of regions would have to be adjusted quite often due to
> changing user populations. Sounds like a lot of trouble to me.

I found it quite interesting to figure it out. At first I thought about 7
or so, but 3 was easier. I can do it anew in 5 years. Or we can
extrapolate trends in growth of internet use now. If we go by internet
users and not people at large.

> Besides, your "balanced regional division"

I called it "more balanced" than the present. I think I am more
modest than you know.

> lacks any notion of qualitative criteria
> such as culture.

With my background I must be all for those. How do we vote on qualitative
criteria? Or rather who? We in Europe think that we have extra of that
quality, this culture. In evidence I'd like to mention the European
anthem.

	Seid umschlungen millionfach
	Diesen Kuss der ganzen Welt.

[There is no official text version of the EU anthem.]

-- 
[19] E@.
http://logoff.org/

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html