[wg-review] Re: [cctld-discuss] Comments on review of DNSO by Mr Park

["Oscar A. Robles Garay" <orobles@nic.mx>]

I strongly support Pilar's comments, as long as we publish documents just in english we are contributing on the ICANN "language divide" which, of course, translates into poor representativeness...

Oscar Robles


On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Pilar Luque wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> After reading this lengthy and interesting report I would like to
> comment the following points.  I will carry on stressing the same point
> of view by e-mail and physically at the ICANN meetings till my voice is
> heard and something will be done about it.
> _______________________________________________________________________________
> 1.
> - Does the existing structure work to generate consensus recommendations
> on
> domain name matters?
>
>     Not very well. However, the sample is small.
> _______________________________________________________________________________
>
> That is my point.  The sample will carry on being  small if every single
> document is just published in English and never translated at least into
> Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, Spanish, German and French.
>
>
>
> 2.
>
> Different voices in the ICANN orbit sometimes argue that there are
>     vast unrepresented blocks of Internet users whose rights are being
>     abused, but there is no actual evidence that this is the case, and
>     lots of evidence to the contrary
> _______________________________________________________________________________
>
>
> I could not disagree more.  The evidence is that participation is very
> low if we take into account the vast majority of Internet stakeholders
> in the world.  In the ccTLD Constituency, to cite the example I know
> best, only 40 ccTLD assist to such meetings out of 240 ccTLD worldwide.
>
>
>
> 3.
> - How can the level of participation by GA members in the GA be
> improved?
> ________________________________________________________________________________
>  I insist that translating basic documents is very importnat in order to
> improve such participation.
>
>
> 4.
> 2. Communicate to the NC the terrible imbalance built in to the
> constituency
> structure, with business lobbying groups given 4 of the 7
> constituencies,
> and
> non-commercial, educational, civil rights and other interests stuffed
> together
> into a single constituency.
> ___________________________________________________________________________________
>
>
> I could not agree more.  Thst is the reason why the ccTLD constituency
> is so porly represented in the ICANN Board.  We should step out of the
> DNSO.
>
>
>
>
> 5.
> Review WG is composed of people from many from North America, Europe and
> a
> few from Asia, Latin America and Africa. As we experineced in previous
> WG A,
> B, C discussion, most active participants are from US, Europe, New
> Zealand
> and Australia who have no problems with reading 57 "English" email
> messages
> a
> day and possibly respond to some of them in "English".
> ___________________________________________________________________________________
>
>
> Believe me it is not that easy to read, understand and answer messages
> not written in your mother tongue.  Who assured you, we non-English
> mother tongue speakers do not have problems to read and "possibly" (well
> observed) respond to "some" (well observed) in "English" (somehow
> patronising if in brackets)
>
>
> I would encourage more members of the ccTLD Constituency to support the
> claim of translating documents so that the DNSO and the ICANN process is
> more fair to all the Internet stakeholders.
>
>
> Excuse my poor English!
>
> Pilar LUQUE (Es-NIC)
> --
> ccTLD Constituency of the DNSO
> Discussion Mailing list
>
>


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