Since I am not getting any volunteers for the Spanish to English translation of my previous email, I will attempt to summarise the main points and hope that the automatic translation does better this time: ICANN's RALOs were created to provide end user input into the ICANN Internet Names and numbers policy process. LACRALO was the first RALO created in Dec 2006. I worked very hard for LACRALO to be created. I worked very hard for LACRALO to get access to some of the resources needed to participate. For example simultaneous interpretation, document translation are some items Nick and I worked on when I was on the ALAC. After leaving the ALAC last year, I have continued to participate. LACRALO in 2 years has commented very little (measured by counting list traffic) on the ICANN policy issues that have come up for end user input. This is even on the ones where the documents have been professionally translated. I sent an email 6 weeks ago suggesting issues that ICANN was asking for input on, to be discussed. I received ONE email on the substance of the issues. There is currently a lot of discussion in the wider At Large about participation requirements. There were some responses to that on the LACRALO list, so it seemed as if the issue was of interest. Taking all of this into consideration, I requested discussion on: 1) The At Large minimum participation requirements and should LACRALO think about implementing such? 2) The education aspects of outreach - are there any suggestions that can be added to the ones that are being raised? 3) Staff efforts towards providing resources for outreach. It is important for the region for our input to be made. For years there have been one or 2 people making all the comments. I worked to create LACRALO to increase the number of people who had a voice in international processes. I am disappointed that the voice is still so little in any of the 6 official languages of the LAC region. And it is important to use it or lose it. And unlike the last time, I attempted to raise policy issues, when Sergio, you sent a nasty and offensive email that didn't refer to ANY of the substantive issues, but sought to attack me in my personal capacity... that is not going to pass again. I gave you a freebie last time, but if you mis-represent the facts and lie about me again, I won't let it pass this time. Stick to the substantive issues and have a productive discussion. Jacqueline presidencia@internauta.org.ar wrote:
[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]
Subject: Re: =?iso-8859-1?q?La_participaci=F3n_de_LACRALO_=28 = =?iso-8859-1?q?carencia_de=29_publica = From: to presidencia@internauta.org.ar
Dear Jackelyn, I do not understand what you mean, you can be but clear? the translator no he allows that comprenderte can clearly and I do not want to answer before without being safe of what your you say, p�dele to some companion ours of Hispanic speech that translates it if it is difficult for you to be able to do it.
I am thankful to you
Sergio
Original Message From: <jam@jacquelinemorris.com> To: <lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 9:20 A.M. Subject: The participation of LACRALO (deficiency of) publishes
[ [ - - Translated text (in - > is)--]] > > > Subject: The participation of LACRALO (deficiency of) publishes > Of: jam@jacquelinemorris.com > > Envie' the email down quoted to the LACQUER I absolutely discuss the list does awhile. > Unfortunately, I have still not seen any improvement in this situation, like > a single post still has not been made to the list in anyone of > substantivas editings of policy that I enumerated. > Nevertheless, has been a certain discussion on the participation of ALAC minute > procedures. > * > * Also I observe that I have not heard much on minimum of LACRALO > participation that to me is a great question for the discussion > dull leading of the discussion of the participation of ALAC: > > * How little participation if LACRALO allows before applying > internal sanctions (is to say before it reaches the stage where ALAC > of-certificara' a ALS)? that is - which are the minimum of LACRALO > requisite of the participation? Observe that the !
participation of ALAC minute > the requirements are in line in > http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/framework.htm#minimumcriteria - > and is few enough ones! > * Must have minimum requirements of the participation? > * If a ALS representative is not participating, what tin LACRALO does > indicates to the ALS that his representative is risking his ALS perhaps > the certification and suggests strongly change to the person? > > is 2 years. There is some ALSes that looks like to have fallen extinguished > the Earth face since sao Paulo - I have not heard, seen, obtained nobodies > indication of its existence since then. I am safe that equalit maintains stops > other regions. > So > More questions for the discussion: > > * Would be better to have little active ALSes that one listsreleases of > the inactive ones? > * How it does this affects exceed efforts - it must in great changing > anyway exceeds to obtain ALSes to that it is more probable > participates, and throughout these lines, how on a study to determine itself > the characteristics of the organizations who have participated > successfully and work on ways to anyone: > or approaches and recruit more "guessed right" groups like > or creates processes to obtain to all the aspirings of ALS "even guessed right > way of the participation "- perhaps" a training rolls "p! rogram or > a model mentoring of the organization... > > But in view of the session passed over the report of the consultation of Mid�?�point of > the group of operation of the overhaul of committee ALAC of the government of the card in > ALAC > Improvements - the participation of the ALSes is an important editing in > success or incident of the ALAC model, is urgent and vital that this > consid�rese in the level of THIN. > > ICANN is an organization who is fixing the policy now. LACRALO is > not to provide to the entrance of information in those policies. The whole end, and > ONLY > indicates, of being a ALS is to provide to the entrance of information in those processes of > political. > If LACRALO does not do this, later all the work that I made try to fix > for above (along with Sebastian, Erick, Jacob and Pablo) would have been lost. > > Now, I admit that there has been commentary and discussion many > in the reasons of the deficiency of the participation in thepast! , being centered mainly > around the deficiency of translation! s to the Spanish and Portuguese. Others > the problem is education in editings. > Nevertheless, with respect to the education publishes, I I would saythat they are > solved at least partially, at least of the face deICANN, since there is > the information (in multiple languages and filed) in most ofthese > the editings, and questions can be done in the list of the discussion > clarification, explanation, etc. I doubt rather that informed > the members of the list (or the personnel of ICANN) to rechazar�anasistir inside > to explain the most technical or darker ends (or still most basic > ends) IF IT IS REQUESTED. > > With respect to the language publishes, although the translations and > the interpretation is high in agenda of ICANN's, are sidomuchos there of > requests of the personnel for the aid of fast and dirty the community re > translations et cetera. Nevertheless, there have been few public answers a > this - there have been some translations of the editing community done th! at > is determined interesting (based on the number of posts) ready wing, > but is not many. > > Also would add that there was an invitation of the personnelof ICANN (Doug and > Denise) to the community to hook to a discussion on the participation, > what people think she needs, require what resources. That > the invitation was translated to the French and Spanish. Still it does not have been > responded a. > > the LACRALO has been in place from 2006 - for THIN the oldest one, that > false bitten to keep saying - we are learning, we are new, we > we are > now beginning... must first the THIN one not lead? > > Jacqueline To Morris > > > Jacqueline To Morris wrote: > is interesting > LACRALO has not had no > discussion on the list on nobodies of editings > puts to the ALAC for > commentaries, for example > Fast Flux > Amendments of RAA >activities of > transference of the secretary and period degracia of the rescue > Improvements of GNSO > IDN > &! gt; IPv6 ayunan track for ccTLDs > front operation of the D! omain Na me > > geographic regions > DNSSEC and the correction of the envenenamiento of the DNS > > but > we has many of the discussion on the reductions of the route and > selection. > > what makes that opinion on interest and priorities of LACRAL�s? >> Jacqueline > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > [ [ - - Original text (in) > http://mm2.icann.org/transbot_archive/6e'e596�a.html > --]] > > > >
_______________________________________________
[[--Original text (es) http://mm2.icann.org/transbot_archive/d98d3ae49a.html --]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en_atlarge-lists...