[AfrICANN-discuss] DCA expresses commitment to work with African ccTLDs

Sat Nov 19 12:28:48 SAST 2011

Dear McTim & Mark Elkins,

It is clear that these negative comments
are an 'over-reaction' to the plain fact that DCA got a very positive press
coverage regarding its good intentions for the African ccTLDs and the
independent media assessment of the Post-Dakar meeting outcomes.

First, we can tell you straightaway that
there is no strategy to split the ccTLDs from AfTLD. It has always been an
aspect of DCA's outreach strategy to reassure this important segment of their
inclusive and participatory stake in DotAfrica, and to present cross-marketing
possibilities and capacity building opportunities to the African ccTLDs who
fear that DotAfrica might further erode their base to attract users and
registrants. So far, apart from DCA, no other prospective applicant has
proposed this to the ccTLDs. 

However, having made this essential
clarification, it is important to stress at this juncture that the presumed
relationship between the AfTLD and the African ccTLD is not really as strong as
it has been made out to be. We have already highlighted the fact that the
African ccTLDs are actually not the owners of the AfTLD (as a registered legal
entity), which to all practical intents and purposes remains separate from, and
does not truly represent, the African ccTLDs. Even so, AfTLD has probably only
1 or 2 ccTLDs in its membership list, so DCA is not doing anything to split
ccTLDs from AfTLD because these ccTLDs are not part of AfTLD in the first
place. Regarding your 'understanding' that AfTLD will be applying for DotAfrica,
perhaps you should undertake further detailed reading of the AU RFP for the
Operation of DotAfrica which insists that Consortia should be formed to include
African ccTLDs. The RFP does not in any way refer to AfTLD. In DCA's
estimation, there seems to be a deliberate plan to exclude AfTLD from these
matters, and the finger should be pointed more accurately at those who are
sidelining and undermining the AfTLD, such as ARC, and the AU DotAfrica Task
Force members who are secretly working on behalf of ARC. 

Now to respond to Mark J. Elkins:

DCA considers its activities at Dakar as
one big resounding success, unlike the ARC that had expected to receive an
endorsement from the African Ministerial Round-Table, but never got what it
wanted out of the Dakar meetings. Perhaps, this explains why you are not happy
that DCA has continued to receive positive press coverage for its great
accomplishments at Dakar. 

However, since you have already raised
the issues, we might as well use this opportunity to make further
clarifications as necessary. DCA believes that it was important to intervene so
as to highlight the fact the African Ministerial Round-Table had no legitimate
representation. It is wrong for a group of people to arrange a meeting and pass
resolutions in the name of African Ministers who were absent, and try to impose
such on a global body like ICANN. It is almost criminal to imagine in its broad
ramifications and ominous portents, so DCA had to act immediately since it is
better to prevent than to cure. 

On the other hand, it is perfectly okay
for the ARC to justify wrong actions that have been undertaken to ensure its
benefits since it was included in the official programme of the meeting,
because it has ‘friends’ within the AU DotAfrica Task Force who have been
bending the rules to accommodate the desires of ARC.

Therefore, DCA stands by its position
that the so-called African Ministerial Round-Table had no proper accredited
ministerial representation. For example, was your South African ICT Minister
present? Or were you (Mark J. Elkins) representing him at the Dakar meetings?

The simple fact is that you people were
chagrined by the fact that DCA was bold enough to show up and challenge the
'agenda of imposition', with a view to preventing a travesty from being
committed in the name of absentee African Ministers. It is no longer relevant
to discuss with anybody whether the agenda was legitimate or illegitimate in
terms of ministerial representation, since ICANN leaders and operatives were
also at Dakar and would remember that there was no quorum of African Ministers
formed; and perhaps only four (4) African Ministers were actually present on
the last day and were not part of the deliberations. Therefore we believe that
there was no proper Ministerial representation to sign up to the Communiqué
that was later submitted to ICANN. DCA therefore expects ICANN to also consider
this when making their official response.

On the veiled attack on personality and
allusions to 'strange behaviour', we will not bother to respond, but DCA also
recalls that it was approached by Mark J. Elkins at Dakar for the purpose of
working together. We deliberately attended the meeting as observers to observe
what was going on, and to make our views heard should we observe that certain things
were not being done in the right way. We are perfectly justified in our Dakar
activities, against the backdrop that at the ICANN Forum, the leaders allowed
DCA the freedom to express its views, whereas in the other two meetings -
Meetings of Experts of the African Ministerial Round-Table' and the DotAfrica
Forum - we saw that there was a deliberate attempt to prevent DCA from
expressing its opinions. The global culture is now democratic, and even in
South Africa, people now have freedom of speech.

Therefore,
you can make as many references as you like to 'personality' in order to engage
in character assassination but we believe the focus should be on what is
important regarding DotAfrica. DCA has reached out to the African ccTLDs since
the Kampala meeting, and everyone recognizes that this is good. In our
estimation, the ARC has not done so, but simply tried to opportunistically
solicit an expression of interest from the AfTLD. When this failed, the ARC has
continued to 'fish for scraps', hoping that the AU DotAfrica Task Force will
give it the DotAfrica registry business to compensate a quiet dog that is
thrown whatever its master decides to give it or whatever falls from its
master's table. We therefore rest our case. 

Key documents from DCA participation on the Dakar Meeting

DCA's participation in Dakar
http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs053/1102516344150/archive/1108602153904.html
DCA's Engagement with ICANN
http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs053/1102516344150/archive/1108422124191.html
DCA's reaction to dotafrica AfriICANN meeting
http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs053/1102516344150/archive/1108347659795.html
DCA's official response to the Ministerial Meeting
http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs053/1102516344150/archive/1108241322041.html
DCA's reaction to ComputerWorld
http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs053/1102516344150/archive/1108601800184.html

DCA's call for ccTLDs on more than 2 occasions in the past June 2011 & Sept 2010
http://www.prlog.org/11563212-dotafrica-africa-made-history-with-icann-in-singapore.html
http://www.prlog.org/10835407-domain-africa-at-kampala-an-invasion-of-armies-cannot-stop-an-idea-whose-time-has-come.html

________________________________
 From: Mark Elkins <mje at posix.co.za>
To: africann at afrinic.net 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 11:55 PM
Subject: Re: [AfrICANN-discuss] DCA expresses commitment to work with African ccTLDs

On Sat, 2011-11-19 at 08:22 +0300, McTim wrote:
> http://www.africasciencenews.org/en/index.php/technology/45-hitech/217-dca-expresses-commitment-to-work-with-african-cctlds
> 
> 
> So the strategy seems to be to split ccTLDs as many ccTLDs from AfTLD
> who are also making a competing bid for .africa. ??

What a beautifully written piece on DCA. Of course, if the reader was
present at ICANN-42 and at the preceding ministerial conference, you'd
possibly have gained a very different impression of the personality.

As an example, I quote: "DCA had participated in all sessions of the
African Ministerial Round Table Meeting as an observer which afforded it
the chance to express its opinions on the agenda of the meeting;"

Observers observe, they don't go to the microphone and suggest to the
ministerial representatives that the meeting has no legitimate
representation (as such has no
 constitutional grounds to even meet) -
and other possibly inappropriate statements. Otherwise, why would the
personality be sternly warned that if she stepped out of line *again*
(which was actually several minutes of chastising from those managing
the meeting), she would be *escorted* out of the room. This chastising
of the personality received a very loud round of applause from the vast
majority of participants.
(I'm trying to be polite)

This was by no means the only public exhibition of her strange behaviour
she provided - for example at the dotAfrica meeting on the Tuesday
evening at ICANN-42.

Anyway - interesting to hear that DCA is now looking at including the
community - which is what her African competition (AfTLD and ARC) have
been doing all along.

If you, the reader, still currently believe that the personality along
with DCA is the most appropriate vehicle to run ".africa", please have
 a
talk to people who saw her in action at ICANN-42.

-- 
  .  .     ___. .__      Posix Systems - (South) Africa
/| /|       / /__      mje at posix.co.za  -  Mark J Elkins, Cisco CCIE
/ |/ |ARK \_/ /__ LKINS  Tel: +27 12 807 0590  Cell: +27 82 601 0496

_______________________________________________
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/20111119/023da01f/attachment-0003.htm