[AfrICANN-discuss] Re: It's like that in life,
there are always bad players and bad losers!
lerato.ma at yahoo.com
Sun Oct 14 00:14:42 SAST 2012
" ICANN General Counsel and Board Governance
Committee's Conflict review, having been appraised of all the facts and details
of the various arms-length relationships many months before this
You are trying to defend yourself by
saying that a review was done many months before which would be your Statement
of Interest that was declared in March 2012. The point is that you have not told us if
there has been any Conflict Review following ICANN's receipt of DCA's letters,
and if there was the outcome of any such review. So please, the issues raised is after the
If you think that the allegations are false, why are you not threatening to sue
DCA for defamation?, against the backdrop that you are legally trained. The fact that you are not umbraged, and threatening to sue DCA shows that you are not quite confident nor comfortable with the
position you find yourself in regarding the Conflict of Interest matter.
I think you must simply take the
honourable path like the other conflicted Board Members, and fully adhere to
ICANN's Gold standard to be achieved regarding Conflict of Interest matters,
and this will be the end of the matter.
> From: Mike Silber <silber.mike at gmail.com>
>To: africann at afrinic.net
>Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2012 12:18 PM
>Subject: [AfrICANN-discuss] Re: It's like that in life, there are always bad players and bad losers!
>I am not in agreement with you (as you may suspect). Your statement
that a conflict "is clear" is not justified on any facts whatsoever,
just Ms Ma's rather vague innuendo.
>What may be surprising to you is that the ICANN General Counsel and
Board Governance Committee's Conflict review, having been appraised
of all the facts and details of the various arms-length
relationships many months before this allegation was raised (rather
than Ms Ma's conjecture) also found no conflict.
>The question is legitimate. Casting aspersions and making false
allegations is not.
>I will be most willing to engage with you (or anyone else not
involved in false allegations) should you be interested.
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>From: Adamou Nacer <adamou.nacer at gmail.com>
>>Date: 13 October 2012 19:29
>>Subject: Re: [AfrICANN-discuss] Itâ€™s like that in life,
there are always bad players and bad losers!
>>To: Lerato <lerato.ma at yahoo.com>, africann at afrinic.net
>>if this is the case, the conflict is clear and Mr
Silber must resign from the ICANN's new gTLD Program
>>Is there an ICANN rule to avoid this kind of
>>Le 13/10/2012 16:53, Lerato a ï¿½crit :
>>>You do not seem to understand what you are talking about. The fact that ZADNA has endorsed UniForum's new gTLD application, and Mike Silber, an ICANN Board Member from South Africa who is also a serving director of South Africa's Domain Names Authority - the ZADNA; and also a member of the new gTLD Program Committee of ICANN is a clear Conflict of Interest situation for him since he would be expected to participate in the decision-making over a new gTLD that the ZADNA has endorsed, and by implication, which he has also endorsed by the mere fact that he is a ZADNA director.
>>>> From: "ngabo at pop.co.za" <ngabo at pop.co.za>
>>>>To: africann at afrinic.net
>>>>Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2012 2:19 AM
>>>>Subject: Re: [AfrICANN-discuss] Itâ€™s like that in life, there are always bad players and bad losers!
>>>>On Fri, 2012-10-12 at 18:19 -0700, Lerato
>>>>"I'm sure the ICANN Board will check the
>>>>> If the ICANN Board
checks the allegations and accepts that they
are true why should you favour UniForum?
Irrespective of the fact that you think that
the letters are so cloak and dagger, and
desperate, why should you condone the fact
that ICANN Board members that have
conflicting interests are going to sit down
in the new gTLD Program Committee to preside
over new gTLD decision-making?
>>>>You assume that the conflict allegations are
>>>>Someone told me that the Internet never
forgets, now there appears to be a lot of
truth in that.
>>>>Mr. Mike Silber, "former director of
UniForum SA" - I have been unable to find
any evidence to support this claim.
>>>>In my research, it looks to me that ZADNA
and UniForum are completely separate
>>>>It seems ZADNA is a creation of the South
African government via their Electronic
Communications and Transactions Act of 2002.
"In 18 May 2007, the Minister of
Communications published a public notice
officially giving .za DNA the full
assumption of management of .za in terms of
section 59 of the ECT Act)."
>>>>Uniforum seems to have been around much
longer. I found "UniForum SA (originally
/usr/group/) in 1988. During 1995 UniForum
SA were delegated the responsibility of
administrating the co.za domain registry"
>>>>"65.(1) The Authority mustï¿½ (a) administer
and manage the .za domain name space;"
>>>>It seems ZADNA wants a Central Registry and
that is why Mr. Chris Disspain company was
consulted... nothing to do with the new gTLD
>>>>Since then, two things appear to be
happening at Uniforum, they have applied for
the "africa" gTLD and perhaps due to their
size, are becoming the "South Africa Central
Registry (ZACR)". There is no suggestion
that one event is dependant on the other. It
also looks like the gTLD "africa" race
started before the ZACR change.
>>>>ZADNA (the government rule maker) seems to
be on the outside of this ZACR (the actor)
change - which make governance sense.
>>>>This didn't take long to research.
>>>>When I see two parties running for the same
goal and one party starts throwing mud at
the other - I tend to support the other. Go
read the subject line...
>AfrICANN mailing list
>AfrICANN at afrinic.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the AfrICANN