Thanks Marc, I needed a laugh. Lou On 1/31/2013 9:12 PM, Marc Perkel wrote: > I'm leaning against the idea of diversity/discrimination in decision > making bodies unless there is a reason to do so. One can not assume > that discrimination exists by default. I don't know if you are talking > about this email group or not but I have no idea what color/gender/or > sexual orientation anyone on this list is. Nor do I care. I see it as > a distinction without a difference. > > I myself am a cybernetic artificial life form from the future. I come > from the planet Kolob. We are an androgynous species. We reproduce by > mitosis, which is splitting in half creating 2 individuals. We are > either invisible or appear to be whatever shape we choose to make you > puny humans feel comfortable. We are a telepathic race and share a > singular consciousness. I communicate with you using a subspace > inter-dimentional modem. > > On 1/31/2013 5:51 PM, Andrew A. Adams wrote: >> Dan and Avri's points are both well-made and strong further arguments >> for >> supporting decent diversity requirements in decision-making bodies. >> >> A further point is that such bodies interact and again we see that same >> dynamic. For small bodies with tens of members it is hard to get >> representation of all groups (and of course individual differences >> between >> members of groups are as large as the differences between groups on many >> occasions). So, for groups which are relatively small percentages of the >> overall population (LGBT, to the best of my knowledge are only a few >> percentage of the entire population) it is difficult to require a >> group of >> only ten to always have one LGBT member. Within the broader set of >> groups, >> however, there should be efforts made to ensure that out of the >> perhaps few >> hundreds of representatives (and over time, multiples of that) that >> at least >> some of these representatives are from these small groups. Again, the >> local >> maximum of one committee and one term should be leavened with >> understanding >> of the longer term benefits of diversity. >> >> Avri's point about how one measures these things applies across all >> of these >> broad considerations also provides us with ethical guidance pointing >> towards >> requiring best efforts in diversity within groups, across groups and >> over >> time, while maintaining open and transparent definitions of "Minimum >> Competence" required (and providing avenues to gain the necessary >> competences >> for those in under-represented groups). ICANN's Fellowship Program is, I >> think, a good example of an effort to provide better geographic >> diversity, >> though there may be room to expand upon it to cover other under- or >> un-represented minority groups rather than simply >> developed/developing nation >> citizenship/residency. >> >> >> >> >> > >