RE: [council] Remote Participation for Senegal

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

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 :) 

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.

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 ï ¿ ½not ableï ¿ ½. Insurance and 
> > > > > travel restrictions to the region donï ¿ ½t allow it.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Of course, there are many that would ï ¿ ½not prefer toï ¿ 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 isï ¿ 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.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hereï ¿ ½s an idea. Letï ¿ 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
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > >
> >