In that case, I think NA should affirmatively say nothing, despite staff's pestering. --Wendy On 01/27/2011 02:07 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
On 27 January 2011 12:18, Gareth Shearman <shearman@victoria.tc.ca> wrote:
This sounds about right to me.
The Caribbean issues do need to be addressed in the process however.
I have been told that this issue is actually being debated as an issue internal to LACRALO, and I'm personally hesitant to get NA involved. The Caribbean contingent is not known for its shyness, and will no doubt make its interests well known.
In casual conversations I have been asked for my personal opinion, if I would foresee any hostility or opposition *if* some LAC members wanted to join NA. I replied that I did not believe any such hostility would exist -- but I clearly said that as representative of nothing beyond my own viewpoint.
I'm very conscious of the fine line between meddling and wanting to be helpful. Maybe I'm being a little too self-silencing, but the rest of the ICANN world already sees itself as getting lectured to by North Americans. IMO, if we have something to say about someone else's regional business it had *better* be both novel and useful.
- Evan ------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org +1 914-374-0613 Fellow, Princeton Center for Information Technology Policy Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/ https://www.torproject.org/ http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/