[AfrICANN-discuss] Comments Regarding Expiration of the JPA with the ICANN

[SM]

At 01:03 02-06-2009, Makane Faye wrote:
>Esam's views should not be a point of contention but of discussion 
>and I concur with

Esam's views are not a point of contention.

At 11:00 01-06-2009, McTim wrote:
>I was as well, perhaps he speaks only for himself?  That's what I
>reckoned anyway.

The African Union Commission is mentioned at the end of the 
document.  As such, he will be seen as speaking on behalf of his employer.

>hahahahahaha

I may stop posting questions if you laugh at them. :-)

>private as in private, non profit (NGO).

The document mentions the liberalization or privatization of ICANN 
after the JPA terminated in September 2009.  For a discussion about 
non-profit, refer to the policy list. :-)

At 12:00 01-06-2009, Katim S. Touray wrote:
>I think the exchange of e-mails also point to two things:
>We need to have a way to collectively articulate our opinions.  I 
>think an opinion from the AU, ECOWAS, or COMESA would carry more 
>weight than opinion (no matter how thoughtful and well-articulated) 
>from an individual, as I imagine Esam's posting is.  In the same 
>vein, I see no reason why individual governments, civil society 
>groups, or chambers of commerce, and trade associations (e.g. 
>professional ICT associations) cannot take this up, and let us know 
>what they think.

It has been mentioned that African countries lack commitment, 
strategy and vision.  It has also been mentioned that the situation 
in Africa is compounded by the fact that some bureaucrats and 
politicians view the ICT revolution as a political affair and not a 
technological challenge.  "Therefore, Africa is not ready yet".

>It would help a lot if we sign our postings with a bit more 
>information that will help identify us.  I mean, what exactly does 
>sm at resistor.net mean?  Who is SM, and where is s(he) from?  Please 
>let us know at least your full name, and organization you are 
>associated with, to help us identify you.

I commented on those questions off-list.  I'll confirm that I am not 
associated with african-union.org. :-)

>Speaking of which, let me say that I am Katim S. Touray, from The 
>Gambia, an ICANN Board member, and speaking here for myself.

In my opinion, that wasn't necessary as you did not sign your post as 
an ICANN Board member.  BTW, canned disclaimers are not effective on 
a public mailing list.

At 12:20 01-06-2009, Dandjinou Pierre wrote:
>It seems to me Esam was speaking for himself; and to my knowledge, 
>the AU has no plan for safeguarding Africa against the so 
>called'privatization'..

If the AU (not to be confused with what Esam said) does not have a 
plan, it does not make sense to ask for more time.

>But I suspect the Af* (AfriNIC, AfNOG, AfrISPA, AfISOC, AfTLD, and 
>AFREN) should be forwarding their collective opinion with regards to 
>the ending of the JPA..

AfriNIC is already represented through ASO.  AfISOC most likely goes 
through ISOC which is more of a global than a regional 
organization.  As for AfTLD, there is already the CCNSO.

At 22:46 01-06-2009, Abulkhirat Esam wrote:
>I would like to clear the misunderstanding on my comments posted on 
>the NITA website regarding the Post-JPA and ICANN.
>http://www.ntia.doc.gov/comments/2009/dnstransition/006.pdf
>
>What I have wrote is totally expressing my own and personal point of 
>view and has no relation at all with my current position in the AUC.

I'll read it as your personal point of view.

>I put my name with title at the end of my comments just to show that 
>I'm talking from inside the loop.

As you are inside the loop, maybe you might be able to help with a 
DNS technical issue.  The africa-union.org hostname points to 0.0.0.0 
as the IP address.

>I never in my comments used any word that can generate impression as 
>if it is AU's position on the matter. (Please read again)

I read the comments several times.

At 00:40 02-06-2009, Dandjinou Pierre wrote:
>All of this indicate we need further exposure and education on the 
>issues on the one hand, and that our 'professional' and 'political' 
>institutions/associations should also self organize to provide their 
>inputs accordingly, on the other hand.

That is a good advice.

Regards,
-sm