RE: [gnso-osc-ops] FW: Potential Agenda Items For This Week's GCOT Call

["Ray Fassett" <ray@xxxxxxxxx>]

Eric, your arguments are valid to me.  However, issues relative to resource
allocation by ICANN staff are best addressed through its FY operating plan
and budget process.  With this said, I believe it could be constructive,
assuming WT agreement, to state as a recommendation from this WT that
ICANN's operating plan should consider and dedicate the necessary resources
for language translation in support of GNSO policy such as, for example,
accepting SOI forms in languages other than English as well as cross
translation services.  I don't think we are getting resistance from staff as
to the vision of this (in fact, I think the contrary is more truthful).  At
the same time, I accept as substantive feedback that if the resource
allocation does not exist today, then our submitting as a near term
recommendation for it, with the RoP as our vehicle for doing so, is not
going to be realistic and likely not accepted by our wider peers as
legitimate.  The legitimacy of WT output is a responsibility I have serving
as your chair.  How  it is we seek to influence resource allocation by staff
through the RoP, outside of the FY operating plan process, is a concern that
I have and one that I have shared.

Thoughts welcome.

Ray



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Eric Brunner-Williams
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 7:19 PM
To: Ray Fassett
Cc: 'gnso-osc-ops'; 'Julie Hedlund'; robert.hoggarth@xxxxxxxxx; 'Ken Bour'
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-ops] FW: Potential Agenda Items For This Week's GCOT
Call


Ray,

I'd like to follow-up on the discussion of the source of the SOI, and 
therefore the form, and language of the SOI.

Ron made the point that English is required, for Air Traffic Control.

Robert, in commenting as Staff, discussed the cost and complexity of 
delivery of translations into all six UN languages.

I think the problem is much smaller. If a volunteer can originate a 
SOI text in a language other than English, then the full-disclosure 
cost into Ron's model is the translation cost of one SOI from X to 
English.

Why is this, accommodation of SOI submissions, if any, in languages 
other than English?

Because the ability to listen and read in a foreign language is almost 
always greater than the ability to speak and write. Receptive language 
skills are almost always greater than active language skills.

A volunteer who is more comfortable in disclosing the subtleties of 
her or his interests in a language other than English should be able 
to do so. We should not encourage accidental, or intentional ellipsis 
of actual interests by volunteers through a "English Only" requirement 
that lacks the temporal necessity and dramatic consequences of error 
that attend Air Traffic Control.

At some point policy on some subject will be developed by a body of 
volunteers all of whom share a first, and second language which is not 
English. It will be absurd to insist that the only language of policy 
development permissible, globally, is English. Translation from the 
language other than English will be necessary, and the SOIs of 
volunteers is about as central to this participatory activity as any.

Thank you for your patience and time.

Eric