Nick Ashton-Hart wrote, On 07/02/2007 14:40:
Just a reminder, there is an open consultation on the Geographic Regions of ICANN, and whether the regions should be changed. 1) Some member-states of the European Union are located in regions outside of Europe, which ought to be changed. In fact, candidate states of the EU might also be better situated within the European region than in others (Turkey comes to mind as an obvious example of this); 2) The Asia-Pacific region is currently enormous. I have heard it said in particular that some representatives of Middle-Eastern groups believe it ought to be a region of it's own, not in the APAC region. My personal opinion is that, indeed, the APAC region is too large and should be split into 3 regions (ie Middle East, Asia and Pacific). The rationale is that the Pacific Islands live in a very different context than Asia, where the economy is booming. The Middle East has its own specific societal values.
More generally, I would leave to each country/territory to select which of two regions it wants to be affiliated with. This would help some some issues that were mentioned earlier: - If Israel finds it difficult to be a member of the Middle East region, it could ask to become a member of European region. After all, it is already a member of the Council of Europe. - Turkey could choose between Middle East and Europe - EU territories outside the European geographic area could choose if they are closer in spirit with Europe or with the region they are geographically located in To make this more logical at the global ICANN level, there should be a consensus decision between the GAC, ccTLD and ALS representatives. In case there is a lack of consensus, the GAC representative's opinion would prevail. I am sure many people will disagree with the above, so let's talk. Patrick Vande Walle