<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] Remote Participation for Senegal
On Jul 21, 2011, at 2:32 PM, Tim Ruiz wrote:
> The point is, there should be no criticism for your not doing so. And I
> realize you may not be "intending" to criticize, but the manner you are
> using to attempt to "understand" sure feels like it :)
While communication is a two way street, the intention of the sender does count
for something. How recipients process it is often beyond the sender's control
>
> In any event, a bigger question in my mind is whether these types of
> meetings are the most effective way to engage all parts of the world. I
> think it would help to have specific "engagement" goals and metrics for
> these meetings so that their effectiveness can be evaluated.
I agree with this, I've raised the point repeatedly with anyone who'll listen
that while we go to these places, once there we don't do much to actually reach
out and engage. So you get, for example, a discussion in Nairobi of outreach
to developing countries that had two Africans and fifty usual suspects in the
room. I'm hopeful this can be taken up in the context of anything that comes
of the Katim proposal.
BD
>
> Tim
>
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: Re: [council] Remote Participation for Senegal
> > From: William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxx>
> > Date: Thu, July 21, 2011 7:21 am
> > To: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > Well as people in my old hoods always said, the personal is political. But
> > if for example I refused to go to theocratic countries that practice
> > torture, execute citizens, consign many others to poverty, invade other
> > countries, contribute to global ecological disaster, and so on, I wouldn't
> > be able to attend meetings in the US�.
> >
> > Everyone calculates differently, I guess.
> >
> > On Jul 21, 2011, at 2:15 PM, Tim Ruiz wrote:
> >
> > > It would depend on the location. In some cases it may be principles
> > > related to personal freedoms. In others, it may be principles related to
> > > ecology and/or use of resources. And in others it may be a National
> > > principle, such as in the USA regarding certain countires considered to
> > > be terrorist friendly.
> > >
> > >
> > > Tim
> > >
> > > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > > Subject: Re: [council] Remote Participation for Senegal
> > > > From: William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxx>
> > > > Date: Thu, July 21, 2011 6:54 am
> > > > To: "Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >
> > > > Hi Tim
> > > >
> > > > Not sure if you were suggesting that I was criticizing someone, but
> > > > just in case: I wasn't.
> > > >
> > > > I am trying to understand the issues, and yes,expressing disappointment
> > > > with the consequences, which is different and not personal.
> > > >
> > > > What for example would be the issue of principle rationale?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > > BD
> > > >
> > > > On Jul 21, 2011, at 1:45 PM, Tim Ruiz wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I am sure that there are many reasons why some of us may ultimately
> > > > > not
> > > > > go, some may be prevented by the issues Adrian pointed out, and others
> > > > > may choose not to for personal reasons - issues of principle, health
> > > > > issues, etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > But one thing is for sure, none of us are responsible for the
> > > > > conditions
> > > > > that exist in different parts of the world. And none of us are being
> > > > > compensated for our participation outside of travel reimbursement for
> > > > > those who decide to accept it (BTW, I no longer do). So NOT ONE of us
> > > > > can or should be criticized directly or indirectly for not attending
> > > > > this meeting, or any other, in person.
> > > > >
> > > > > On a different note, these types of ICANN meetings are not necessary
> > > > > to
> > > > > "engage" all parts of the world. I have no doubt there are much
> > > > > effective ways to engage various parts of world than these meetings.
> > > > >
> > > > > Tim
> > > > >
> > > > > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [council] Remote Participation for Senegal
> > > > > > From: William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxx>
> > > > > > Date: Thu, July 21, 2011 6:29 am
> > > > > > To: Adrian Kinderis <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Cc: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
> > > > > > <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So are the insurance policies such that basically all of Africa off
> > > > > > limits other than MENA and SA?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We're setting global policies that Africans have to live with,
> > > > > > seems unfortunate if engaging them is off limits..
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > B
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Jul 21, 2011, at 1:22 PM, Adrian Kinderis wrote:
> > > > > > From what I understand it is Ã∞¯ ¿ ½not ableÃ∞¯ ¿ ½.
> > > > > > Insurance and travel restrictions to the region donÃ∞¯ ¿ ½t
> > > > > > allow it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Of course, there are many that would Ã∞¯ ¿ ½not prefer toÃ∞¯ ¿
> > > > > > ½ given the above.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Adrian Kinderis
> > > > > > Chief Executive Officer
> > > > > > AusRegistry International Pty Ltd
> > > > > > Level 8, 10 Queens Road
> > > > > > Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004
> > > > > > Ph: +61 3 9866 3710
> > > > > > Fax: +61 3 9866 1970
> > > > > > Email: adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > Web: www.ausregistry.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - Follow AusRegistry International on Twitter:
> > > > > > www.twitter.com/ausregistryint
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The information contained in this communication is intended for the
> > > > > > named recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain
> > > > > > legally privileged and confidential information and if you are not
> > > > > > an intended recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take
> > > > > > any action in reliance on it. If you have received this
> > > > > > communication in error, please delete all copies from your system
> > > > > > and notify us immediately.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake@xxxxxx]
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, 21 July 2011 9:21 PM
> > > > > > To: Adrian Kinderis
> > > > > > Cc: Tim Ruiz; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [council] Remote Participation for Senegal
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Adrian
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do you mean "to not be able" or "to not prefer"?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Just wondering how high the special barrier some folks face isÃ∞¯
> > > > > > ¿ ½
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bill
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Jul 21, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Adrian Kinderis wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This makes me mad.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am not mad at Tim, far from it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But why ICANN continually chooses places that forces key
> > > > > > stakeholders and contributors to not be able to participate to the
> > > > > > fullest.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Crazy.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > HereÃ∞¯ ¿ ½s an idea. LetÃ∞¯ ¿ ½s build a remote site and
> > > > > > EVERYONE go there...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > LA Marriott anyone?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Adrian Kinderis
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, 21 July 2011 3:24 AM
> > > > > > To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > Subject: [council] Remote Participation for Senegal
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Glen,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Can you provide an update of on the expected availability of remote
> > > > > > participation for Senegal?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Also to all, if there is any movement toward a US or EU remote
> > > > > > participation base, I would be up for that and doing what I could to
> > > > > > help cover costs. I think John was asking about this earlier. Any
> > > > > > interests?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Either way, after further consideration I think I may be attending
> > > > > > only
> > > > > > remotely.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tim
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|