Hi! > >1. in the past ISOC (and PIR now), support workshops like WALC in >Latin > >America. > >PIR and ISOC have no "taxing authority" like ICANN and are independent, >voluntary organizations. I don't think this is a relevant argument. It's a argument to say another organizations support this kind of thing is development countries, why not ICANN? > >2. ICANN support the WGIG > >Yes, this is quite relevant, it is the same issue: building political >support for itself by supporting other efforts. But its support of WGIG >was controversial and could be questioned. If ICANN did it once, it does >not mean we should support more of it. You still have to make a case on >the merits. Of course, anything is controversial, but we need to think if this controversial acts can help to develop more strong internet communities... A lot of organizations use funds from international organizations and this don't mean that this organizations be "at services" of the "funds". > >3. In future ICANN will develop regional offices, that work in >outreach. > >Should it? What exactly is "outreach?" Interesting question, but i prefer to answer in spanish. > >And more.. we can put the organizations that support in one side and >the > >organizations that are against in another side and present both >positions. > >This is quite possible, could be a way to do it if agreement is not >possible. agreement?, at this moment.. we have: Robin Gross (IP Justice) - against icann proposal Erick Iriarte (Alfa-Redi) - in favor icann proposal Iliya Nickelt () - in doubt Erick >--MM