Re: [AfrICANN-discuss] The Google campaign – An ITU view
Dr Yassin Mshana
ymshana2003 at gmail.com
Mon Dec 3 16:08:04 SAST 2012
It is good to discuss issues of importance.
It is clear in the Policy from which the Guidebook was developed about
Geographic Regions etc....
BUT the Guidebook does not guide us on "How to Engage" such bodies in its
procesess.... it is left for a wider interpretation assuming that
"professionalism" will be adhehered to, and regional consultations will
take place....are you there?
NEXT: The Guidebook did not allow for such 'name calling' and 'rumbling'
taking place for .africa; it does not say that some individuals may consult
with Governments to discredit any organisations.....
Lastly, Name calling may result into the affected seeking Legal
intervetions for character assassination or worse - it is possible..
On 3 December 2012 13:08, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 7:32 AM, Dr Yassin Mshana <ymshana2003 at gmail.com>
> > Hello Tim et all, I am having a problem with the Statement below:
> I am happy to engage on the facts.
> > "If you see the matter as I do, that ICANN has asked that governmental
> > and/or intergovernmental entities weigh in on new gTLDs that have a
> > geographic scope, it is perfectly reasonable to have the AU involved."
> > The issue here is that, was a concensus or even consultations to involve
> > AU or AUC in any case? <That is what culminates to abuse and
> > I referred to>
> NO consensus or consultations were needed to include the AU/AUC as it
> is REQUIRED by the Guidebook:
> An applied-for gTLD string that falls into any of 1 through 4
> listed above is considered to represent a geographic
> name. In the event of any doubt, it is in the applicant’s
> interest to consult with relevant governments and public
> authorities and enlist their support or non-objection prior to
> submission of the application, in order to preclude possible
> objections and pre-address any ambiguities concerning
> the string and applicable requirements.
> > You say, "It is perfectly reasonable" by Who? You, or Africans who were
> > consulted?
> By anyone who reads the Guidebook I think.
> In any case, was it not clear to DCA that they would want AU/AUC
> support when they asked for a letter of support several years ago from
> the AUC?
> > Please ...it is matter of principle - It is surprising to sede the AUC
> > dragged along without checking what the Political body is being put into.
> > That is where misleading took place OR maybe the advisory to the AUC are
> > part na d parcel of the whole act? If so, I for one need to know as I
> > not accept to see Africans denied of their voices on issues which are
> > important to Africa.
> Take it up with the authors of the Guidebook. They opened the door for the
> and I am not surprised that the AU acted as they did.
> Was the AU misled?? I see no evidence of that!
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
> route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel
c/o DFID-Sierra Leone
5 Off Spur Road, Wilberforce
Skype: yassinmshana1, Mobile:+23276926697, Fax: (+232) 22235769
*Do You really NEED TO PRINT THIS?*
* "The illiterates of the 21st century are not those who cannot read or*
* write** but those who cannot learn, relearn and unlearn" Alvin Toffler*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the AfrICANN