Is this a campaign or what? It will soon be tiring to read everything posted - pollution of ideas or what shall this be called? <div><br></div><div>It is time to Vote and do it wisely.</div><div><br></div><div>Kind regards</div>
<div><br></div><div>Yassin .<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 19 November 2010 08:28, McTim <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dogwallah@gmail.com">dogwallah@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 9:09 AM, Lerato Mamboleo <<a href="http://lerato.ma" target="_blank">lerato.ma</a>@<a href="http://yahoo.com" target="_blank">yahoo.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<snip><br>
<div class="im"><br>
> It was brought up because it has been marketed by people that we did not<br>
> disclose it to.<br>
<br>
</div>I see.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
<br>
> I for one, would love to see the original "mandate" from the AU to<br>
> DCA.....Could you post it please?<br>
><br>
> Do you know what a "mandate" is?<br>
<br>
</div>As a native English speaker, I am happy with this definition:<br>
<a href="http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mandate" target="_blank">http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mandate</a><br>
<div class="im"><br>
<br>
> You also just answered your own question.<br>
> Your request for disclosure contradicts your own comment above where you<br>
> said, "...have not seen in this thread that alluded to that...."<br>
<br>
</div>Now I think you are confused. I am asking to see the original mandate<br>
from AU to DCA. I ask again, will you publish that for the community<br>
to see?<br>
<br>
,snip><br>
<div class="im"><br>
<br>
> All paths to hell are paved with good intention, in this case the<br>
> "consensuses" to what? Approval to do what? You have not separated<br>
> the orange from the apple in this case. Again, we shall leave that job to<br>
> ICANN.<br>
<br>
</div>Which leaves us in a situation where .africa may not be delegated at<br>
all if more than one government objects.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
><br>
> What really confuses me most is DCA's many prior claims to a mandate<br>
> from the AU, but now you say the AU will not be "arbitrator for the<br>
> process."<br>
><br>
> Again, you also keep raising the same question.<br>
<br>
</div>Because I haven't gotten a satisfactory answer.yet.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
What is a "mandate" for<br>
> you?<br>
<br>
</div>see above definition<br>
<div class="im"><br>
There is no process for AU to arbitrate; nor can DCA do that. ICANN is<br>
> the arbitrator of the process. Do you know what "arbitration is '?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>ICANN will not arbitrate, they will use DRSPs for that according to<br>
the Guidebook.<br>
<br>
I'm not sure it would reach a DRSP, as the Guidebook also says: "If<br>
there is more than one application for a string<br>
representing a certain geographic name as described in<br>
this section, and the applications have requisite<br>
government approvals, the applications will be suspended<br>
pending resolution by the applicants."<br>
<br>
<a href="http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/arbitration" target="_blank">http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/arbitration</a> #3 seems an adequate definition to me.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
<br>
><br>
> I suggest that you cannot have it both ways, can you?<br>
><br>
> can they?<br>
<br>
</div>"they", as in .<a href="http://dotafrica.org" target="_blank">dotafrica.org</a> are not trying to. they have not claimed<br>
a mandate from AU, nor have they claimed that AU should not be<br>
involved.<br>
<br>
My question to you still stands. Can you provide a more reasonable<br>
answer please?<br>
<div class="im"><br>
<br>
><br>
> to provide clarity to this confusion; unfortunately DCA has also been<br>
> busy on the ground delivering, since AU even during a recent meeting<br>
> has assured us that none of the letters they have issued should stop<br>
> us from continuing our work (meeting minutes can be provided).<br>
><br>
> Please do provide for clarity.<br>
><br>
> That clarity is in the whole statement, you may want to read it again,<br>
> unless of course that you are again "alluding" to ask for disclosure, that<br>
> which you claimed above no one is asking.<br>
<br>
</div>You have offered to provide minutes for a meeting, I am simply taking<br>
you up on that offer. Please provide said minutes for clarity.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
<br>
><br>
>> 5-The posting by DCA for the ICANN Board seat 15 was done at the<br>
>> appropriate forum,<br>
><br>
> appropriate forum, inappropriate content. Really, in the Internet<br>
> governance world, we do not behave in such a manner.<br>
><br>
> Does content on internet governance selectively applies to particular group<br>
> or organization, or email group?<br>
<br>
</div>no, I did not claim that.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
Did you support the same view during the<br>
> recent "inappropriate content" in Kicktnet, where you are also a member, or<br>
> here on AfriICANN earlier on this email?<br>
<br>
</div>What was posted to the Kictanet list was a letter from the AU rep to<br>
DCA. It contained no inappropriate content. If it should have been<br>
posted is a question I leave to the readers.<br>
<br>
Once your 8 point statement was posted to the Wiki, it's in the public domain.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
In this case, how can you have<br>
> the credence to say to define "what is inappropriate" or not.?<br>
<br>
</div>As I have said repeatedly, the Candidate has offered to recuse himself<br>
in advance on this specific issue. you say there is a COI, I say that<br>
there is a potential which has already been satisfactorily addressed<br>
in the Q and A on that forum.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
<br>
><br>
>> which is the currently ongoing, so everyone has a right to air<br>
> their opinion on that forum. DCA did not circulate the posting<br>
> inappropriately,<br>
<br>
</div>We will have to agree to disagree on that.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
<br>
><br>
> Since the question of potential conflict by Candidates had already<br>
> been addressed on the at-large workspace, I do consider it an<br>
> inappropriate posting.<br>
><br>
> That was a pre-empted question/answer, even before our posting. The<br>
> candidate should have disclosed his COI in his SOI, as per ICANN rule. If<br>
> not, he has exposed himself to the 8 counts of COI that we have stated.<br>
> Legitimate concerns and facts can be presented anytime. Rules are also<br>
> meant to be followed.<br>
<br>
</div>yes, and we have some unwritten rules in the Internet Governance<br>
world. One of them is that questioning a persons integrity is beyond<br>
the pale. You may not consider it an ad hominem message, but I and<br>
many others do. it seems to me that this is self defeating for DCA.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
><br>
>> unlike those who have taken the privilege of circulating unauthenticated<br>
>> letters that has not even been addressed to them.<br>
><br>
> Are you saying that the letter from the AU is not authentic?<br>
><br>
> your question can be answered if you read the letter cautiously again.<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>no, it can't. I would like a yes or no answer from you please.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
<br>
><br>
> Am afraid McTim, and due respect your question may be valid, however unless<br>
> you are not appointed to be an arbitrator between ICANN/AU/DCA or any other<br>
> that you may have not disclosed, It makes no sense to clarify further on<br>
> this issue that deals with competing gtlds and who is the best application<br>
> or not to the proper authorities. Again, the decision is not ours, there is<br>
> a process that will determine that and is called guidebook, and we should<br>
> leave that to ICANN, the decision maker.<br>
<br>
</div>I would suggest you read the guidebook again. You seem to think that<br>
if two competing geo-string applicants both apply for the same string,<br>
ICANN will decide between the two. My reading of the Guidebook<br>
suggests that that is not the case.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
--<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5">Cheers,<br>
<br>
McTim<br>
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A<br>
route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
AfrICANN mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:AfrICANN@afrinic.net">AfrICANN@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/africann" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/africann</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>c/o DFID-Sierra Leone<br>5 Off Spur Road<br>Wilberforce<br>Freetown<br>SIERRA LEONE<br><br>Skype: yassinmshana1<br><br>Mobile:+23276926697 <br>Fax: (+232) 22235769<br>
Do You really NEED TO PRINT THIS?<br><br>
</div>