[AfrICANN-discuss] Breaking News: DotConnectAfrica Trust WinsResounding Victory against ICANN in IRP Accountability

Dr Eberhard W Lisse el at lisse.na
Mon Jul 20 12:59:35 UTC 2015

Nobody has been prevented from reading the GAC Communique, the Board Decisions and/or the documents filed in the case.

Nobody has been prevented from reading either applicant's side of the story, though the sock-puppetry makes it difficult, I have to admit.

Nobody has been prevented from making up ones mind after and during the above.

The issue is not one of Africans being denied "their" new gTLD, or even worse, suffering during the denial, being forced to register somewhere else, which is plain nonsense. And whether .AFRICA is important remains to be seen, I am somewhat doubtful, personally.

The issue is one of ICANN, and its Board, and its Advisory Committee, and its Staff having had handed parts of their anatomy to them, because of the way they have been dealing with an Applicant, unfairly in the case of the Board, non-transparently and non-objectively (at least) by the GAC, and with staggering arrogance by staff.

As the other half of Team Caucasian (remember, sock-puppy famously pointed to an image of my family on my web site (could be that she wanted to imply that I had gone to some length hiding that I was a racist, but probably she was just tired and emotional again)) I am the last person on earth wanting her to get .AFRICA, but every Application must treated fairly and on its merits.

Of which they are NONE in sock-puppy's Application:

She needed support by 60% of African governments' at a certain point during her Application, and she has all but admitted that she does not.  She asked the panel to reset the clock and give her 18 (further) months to get those who have not issued a letter of support (well before the deadline) to do so now (well after deadline) and to convince of the large number of those who did, by writing such letter in support of the other bid (well before deadline), a significant number to withdraw and issue a new one (well after deadline).

The panel's members did not have to be as eminent as they are to see through such an idiotic request.

As stated here before, I have been appointed by the chartering ccNSO to the CCWG Accountability, where I feel I should look out for the interests of smaller ccTLDs, in particular African ones, even if lethargy is only surpassed by naiveté here and this is not directly a ccTLD Issue.

This (multi-year commitment to significant workload) puts me at least in a position to be able to raise the underlying causes identified by the IRP panel within ICANN in a forum which at least has some small form of leverage. 

I doubt we can ever get staff to behave any better than sock-puppy, but I remain somewhat confident that we can make the GAC become more transparent if not more objective, it is after all a Committee of ICANN, giving advice to the Board, and not a multilateral treaty organization appointing the Board. I am more confident in making the Board behave a little fairer and more diligently. 

That will also help the smaller ccTLDs who are being railroaded in a similar manner.

I must repeat myself, nobody has been prevented from participating in the CCWG Accountability.

All the hyperventilating here is fun, but has not consequences.

Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini

> On Jul 17, 2015, at 19:08, Mwendwa Kivuva <Kivuva at transworldafrica.com> wrote:
> Thank you Seun,
> The community is caught in between not really knowing what is happening.  We are left to make judgement from the many news articles and blogs written by either independed or partisan interests.
> We have a saying in Swahili "fahali wawili wanapopigana, ni nyasi huumia". Loosely translated as "When two bulls fight, its the grass that suffers". In this case, the community is missing out in use of the important .africa string. For example,  the East African community is forced to use eac.int while eac.africa would have sufficed. Of course there are other examples like ecowas.africa comesa.africa sadc.africa e.t.c.
> I think we should be every firm in castigating ICANN for not following due diligence in the .africa application. The transparency and accountability track should ensure there are mechanisms in place to avoid the scenario we are in from occurring again. The  bill of the IRP process which is in excess of US $ 606,114 could have been put into better use. 
> Regards
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150720/5a2f55c8/attachment.html

More information about the AfrICANN mailing list