> >That's not quite true - the study will be presented in many languages.
> The main issue is not the presentation of the study but the realization.
I dealt with the email as sent -
"A study about how well represented are Internet users "worldwide" is
ONLY in English."
The study is not in English only. Thus that is incorrect.
BTW - I am NOT involved in the GNSO study - and am certainly not defensive =
-
I'm just getting really tired of emails back and forth that complain about
how things are being done without commending the organisation\s that are
trying to reach out and get us involved. We've been complaining for ages
that we have no avenue for participation - now that someone sets one up - we
complain that it isn't perfect and exactly what we want? Well - I think that
we absolutely need to participate and tell them, help them to get it better,
to get it right as we want it. Laughing about it among ourselves on this
list doesn't do anything to improve anything.

> I dont know yet if the survey is translated in the same 7 languages,
> I will know when I receive the access code soon and report.
> This is key.
The SURVEY is in English only, per the original email - they had a lack of
resources to translate it - I asked them. Did anyone else? Did anyone offer
to help? However they will take submissions via email in any of the
languages on the website.

Yes there is cheap translation - volunteer, sponsored - cheap does not mean
low quality. Cheap means low cost to the organisation. (If someone wants to
pay for it for them, or organise volunteers to do quality human translation
- that would be cheap on the budget, wouldn't it?) I never mentioned
automatic translation, did I? Why should that be assumed? There was a long
discussion on CIVIC about the current state of automatic translation, and I
agreed that human translation was way better.

>I stick on my principle: no automatic translation for documents and
> I warn: dont play with cheap translation with surveys...
And you are still talking about something that I never brought up.

So - if they don't have the resources to translate the survey instrument -
what more can they do rather than what they have done - which is put the
info there in other languages and say - OK - email us your points , your
issues, your criticisms in any of the 7 languages?

>instead of snickering?
> Some people can participate, other can only offer a critical opinion,
> other are watching. Diversity is the word and shall be respected.
>
> Both are very useful and the defensive reaction of asking every critic
> to be met with a specific positive action is just another subbtle form
> of censorship. Sometimes I disagree and I dont have the time or the
> capacity to make a counter proposal: do you mean I should just shut up?
I totally disagree - criticism is fine, but you have to let the ppl who can
make a change know, or else it's a waste of time; and not just laugh about
it among yourselves - yeah - look at some more clueless people! Did
anyone write ICANN or LSE and tell them these criticisms?

>If you are going to stay long linked to ICANN you should learn to have
> stronger skin and instead of getting nerveous with spontaneaous critical
> statements to hope them.
Sorry - don't understand this at all - my skin is fine, and I'm certainly
not nervous. I'm with ICANN's ALAC for 2 years. But I've been interested and
participating in the discussions and surveys for quite a while. I disagree
with a lot of what has happened, and what has been done, but I express my
criticisms to ICANN, to IGF, to the people who can take the criticism on
board, and maybe do something about it.

> Rodriguez's note trigger a suseful debate.
> If really ICANN is doing correct moves for linguistic diversity
> this will show up and Rodriguez's note will contributed to Icann's image.
> If not, ICANN is receiving the right pressure at the right moment,
> because there is still time to improve.
Depends - did the note go to ICANN or to LSE or was it just sent here to
laugh about - ICANN joke? If it wasn't sent to them, then HOW can they
expect to make changes?

> The reality is probably in between and ICANN should be glad that
> this debate bring useful perspectives and at the same time
> put light on this current project.
Yet again - has anyone sent copies of these concerns to ICANN or to LSE?
Otherwise it's just a waste of time. Maybe CARDICIS should (as I originally
suggested) draft a note and send it, noting concerns and suggesting options.
That might be useful. This certainly isn't - to my mind.

--
Jacqueline Morris
www.carnivalondenet.com
T&T Music and videos online