[AfrICANN-discuss] On dot.africa

[Sophia B]

Nii -

I do not see your response as a proposal, instead an information that you
are supplying as to who and what will be done from your own perspective and
af*.

While all of af* may be mandated to promote development of ICT and free
expression as you said, there should not be doors closed on any new
initiative and 'dot.africa' is one such intiative we have started long
before af* that promotes the same.   We intend to pursue it as is, give that
af* do not want to work with us.

Finally, please note that 'support.dotafrica at gmail.com is associated with
the dot.africa initiative that we have launched and I am not sure why it
should be referred as 'foreign'.

Thank you.
sophia

On 19/11/2007, Nii Quaynor <quaynor at ghana.com> wrote:
>
>  please,
>
> there is a commitee comprising senior technical people from the af*
> organizations and suggest that we stop using foreign addresses such as
> support.dotafrica at gmail.com in our discussions initialy.
>
> secondly, afrinic is an existing af* organization and is demanded by its
> mandate to promote development of ict and is free to express itself through
> work/support/facilitation as it wishes, including dotafrica, imho
>
> lastly, the coordinator of the group, pierre ouedraogo would advise on
> future lists focussing on dotafrica debates, its membership, its
> organization, its sponsors and processes pdp/urdp etc. better we focus on
> building infrastructure with capacity.
>
> nii
>
>
>
>  ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Adiel A. Akplogan <adiel at afrinic.net>
> *To:* sophiabekele at gmail.com ; africann at afrinic.net ; africann at afrinic.net;
> support.dotafrica at gmail.com
> *Sent:* Monday, November 19, 2007 1:10 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [AfrICANN-discuss] On dot.africa
>
>
> At 13:01 17/11/2007 -0800, support wrote:
>
> Your response sounds like political babble, contradictory
> and inflammatory.
>   1) AfriNIC has not chosen to make anything public. All mailing    has
> what is called "achieves" which are publicly available
>
>
> This statement is contradictory. I do not see the
> point of obscuring the thread, while all of the email thread
> should be transparent.
>
>
> I directed you to:
>
> http://www.afrinic.net/mailinglist.htm
>
> which leads to (by clicking on archives):
>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/africann/
>
> which should take you to (October archives)
>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/africann/2007-October/thread.html
>
> ... where I don't see any cut from the thread of the discussion
> you are referring to..
>
> I'm clarifying this because you keep accusing AfriNIC as
> institution based on clueless affirmations. Nothing personal
> and no intention to polemic.
>
> Thanks.
>
> - a.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> AfrICANN mailing list
> AfrICANN at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/africann
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/africann/attachments/20071119/708c0c7a/attachment.htm