At 26/09/2008 05:50 PM, John Levine wrote:
I agree with this, too. How fluent one is in English makes a big difference in the way one can contribute.
Indeed. The ICANN bylaws specifically say that board members and Nomcom members must be "able to work and communicate in written and spoken English."
Given the realities of working with ICANN, perhaps the ALAC would work better if it encouraged the RALOs and Nomcom to select members who can work in both English and their home country languages.
On the other hand, language issues don't entirely explain the participation problems, since there are several members who speak fluent English but haven't been very active. My experience in the ALAC was that the biggest problem was the stream of stuff coming at us from the rest of ICANN with unpredictable and often short schedules, and the fact that members of most (all?) of the other committees do their ICANN work as part of their day jobs, but we're all volunteers doing this in our spare time.
R's, John
I have to agree about the need for English. I have often been in a position where I have tried to make do with my poor French and I *know* I have not been nearly as effective as I could have been. And at times have functioned at a level far below one I could be proud of. And there were many times when I sent someone else who was fluent in French just to ensure that my institution was well represented. So I understand the issue from both sides and I feel that the regions and ICANN would be better served by selecting people who can function well in English. But we also need people who can put a reasonable amount of time into ICANN as well. Certainly many ICANN volunteers can consider their ICANN work part of their paid jobs, but I know many who put a LOT of their own time into it. Alan