[NCSG-Discuss] On Diversity and Discrimination

[Marc Perkel]

I agree with geographic diversity.

On 2/3/2013 8:59 PM, David Cake wrote:
>
> On 31/01/2013, at 10:03 PM, Marc Perkel <marc at CHURCHOFREALITY.ORG 
> <mailto:marc at CHURCHOFREALITY.ORG>> wrote:
>
>> I agree on interest diversity. Third world view needs representation. 
>> I'm from West Virginia, kind of third world if you've ever been 
>> there. NGOs, education, Libertarians, genius geeks, and hookers. 
>> Hookers are always being discriminated against.
>
> I have friends who run sex worker activism NGOs (including one that is 
> sex worker run by charter). Next time I see them I'll ask if they want 
> to join NCUC. I think they'd be perfectly welcome here, and would fit 
> in, but I'm not sure how much of a policy priority ICANN issues might 
> be for them (but hey, .xxx, IFFOR, legal restrictions on advertising 
> in some jurisdictions, etc - maybe they do have enough to justify 
> their participation, I don't know).
>
>
>> But - I agree with the premise about a broad range of ideas. But I'm 
>> not sure that the source of broad range means gender/sexual 
>> preferences/ or the frequencies of light reflected off the surface of 
>> the skin. Especially since we communicate by email, I have no idea 
>> what color anyone is, nor do I care. If we go back 75,000 years we 
>> all come from Africa and humans are less genetically diverse than my 
>> 3 cats.
>
> The actual ICANN requirements (and requirements within this group) are 
> for geographic diversity. I represented the Asia/Pacific on our EC for 
> a while, and as it happens I'm a white guy - but I do actually live in 
> Australia, which is in that region, and so satisfy the requirements. 
> Norbert has replaced me. He is also a white guy. He lives in Cambodia. 
> Our residency does actually change our perspective, and inform our 
> participation.
>
>
> On 31/01/2013, at 11:11 PM, Marc Perkel <marc at CHURCHOFREALITY.ORG 
> <mailto:marc at CHURCHOFREALITY.ORG>> wrote:
>> I think my definitions of diversity are more relevant than the 
>> traditional one in this context.
> I do not. I think both your definitions of diversity and the 
> traditional ones, however you define them, are equally irrelevant, 
> neither more relevant than the other.
> What are more relevant than either are the rules that actually apply 
> within the ICANN world, the most significant of which is geographic 
> diversity.
> Cheers
> David

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20130203/f1a2c9fb/attachment-0001.html>