Nick Ashton-Hart ha scritto:
I'm wondering if the comments Carlton Samuels made recently are relevant here with respect to all Small Island States.
Would there be value in discussing whether or not all small island states might be either:
1) Their own region - irrespective of their physical location; 2) In a region of their own, but also associated with the region they are geographically in.
As a caveat to this discussion, keep in mind that at this point in time the addition of a region in ICANN implies the expansion of all the bodies that have a regional structure to accommodate representatives of the new region; the original design was to have a very limited number of regions, all more or less the same size (even if this is clearly untrue for Asia/Pacific) and thus having the same quantitative representation. If you wanted to create many new regions, or regions much smaller than the others, or "double region" affiliations... all of this would require significant changes in the Bylaws, in cost allocations, in representational mechanisms, and in the way ICANN works. This isn't an impossible feat - and there definitely are parts of the world that are not well represented, while others are clearly overrepresented - but I don't want to give illusions to anyone that creating new regions (as opposed to moving some territories from one region to another, which is the intended subject of the consultation) would be an easy change. Perhaps there would be ways to address this problem other than creating further regions. -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------