I agree with geographic diversity. On 2/3/2013 8:59 PM, David Cake wrote: > > On 31/01/2013, at 10:03 PM, Marc Perkel <[log in to unmask] > <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: > >> I agree on interest diversity. Third world view needs representation. >> I'm from West Virginia, kind of third world if you've ever been >> there. NGOs, education, Libertarians, genius geeks, and hookers. >> Hookers are always being discriminated against. > > I have friends who run sex worker activism NGOs (including one that is > sex worker run by charter). Next time I see them I'll ask if they want > to join NCUC. I think they'd be perfectly welcome here, and would fit > in, but I'm not sure how much of a policy priority ICANN issues might > be for them (but hey, .xxx, IFFOR, legal restrictions on advertising > in some jurisdictions, etc - maybe they do have enough to justify > their participation, I don't know). > > >> But - I agree with the premise about a broad range of ideas. But I'm >> not sure that the source of broad range means gender/sexual >> preferences/ or the frequencies of light reflected off the surface of >> the skin. Especially since we communicate by email, I have no idea >> what color anyone is, nor do I care. If we go back 75,000 years we >> all come from Africa and humans are less genetically diverse than my >> 3 cats. > > The actual ICANN requirements (and requirements within this group) are > for geographic diversity. I represented the Asia/Pacific on our EC for > a while, and as it happens I'm a white guy - but I do actually live in > Australia, which is in that region, and so satisfy the requirements. > Norbert has replaced me. He is also a white guy. He lives in Cambodia. > Our residency does actually change our perspective, and inform our > participation. > > > On 31/01/2013, at 11:11 PM, Marc Perkel <[log in to unmask] > <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: >> I think my definitions of diversity are more relevant than the >> traditional one in this context. > I do not. I think both your definitions of diversity and the > traditional ones, however you define them, are equally irrelevant, > neither more relevant than the other. > What are more relevant than either are the rules that actually apply > within the ICANN world, the most significant of which is geographic > diversity. > Cheers > David