[Community-Discuss] Demanding Clarification and/or apology from PTA

[Owen DeLong]

> On Jun 15, 2022, at 09:22 , Amin Dayekh <admin at megamore.ng> wrote:
> 
> Owen,
> 
> Don’t rush, all in good time. 
> 
> Yes Misleading the public on claims and claims and claims with no single piece of evidence! 
> 
> AfriNic acted according to the Bylaw and court, allow me here to refresh your memory, if the ipv4 is not restricted to ise in Africa then why the proposals for inter RIR transfer and Other proposals from the Meeting which are available online? If that is allowed then AfriNic shouod have lost all cases. What is happening in Mauritius is an abuse of the Judicial System. 

Because many resource holders wish to be able to sell their underutilized resources in a worldwide secondary market. Other companies wish to be able to obtain addresses from that same market once the artificially constrained AFRINIC free pool is exhausted. Because some companies would prefer to consolidate their global resources from multiple RIRs to a single contract with a single RIR. There are a variety of reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with any idea of geographic restriction on usage.

If what you say is true, then RIPE-NCC should be going after a number of companies who are operating in Africa using primarily RIPE-NCC issued space. Note that this is not an issue and nobody has ever claimed it to be an issue. This allegation that AFRINIC addresses are restricted to Africa is a fiction that has only ever been promulgated in the context of AFRINIC and has never received serious attention in any other RIR.

AFRINIC has not won or last any cases yet regarding the geographical restriction of IP Utilization. This is more misinformation from you.

I expect that with regard to that particular issue, AFRINIC will lose, as a plain text reading of the governing documents does not support such aa restriction except in the case of addresses issued after the activation of the soft landing policy.

What is happening in Mauritius is a member attempting to defend their rights under the contract they signed against a board that is misconstruing the bylaws and acting outside of its authority.

The board has repeatedly lost, though it has achieved a few procedural victories. Despite its victories, the board remains subject to a series of injunctions preventing it from taking any of multiple illegal actions it has attempted, including its attempt to run a rigged election. Most of the cases are still undecided.

> Anyone can convince himself with any lie and convince the minions involved in this issue who have been (mislead) and unfortunately (paid to spread lie)

I have not and will not lie on behalf of any employer or client. This statement is an ad hominem attack, is inappropriate to the list, and is, frankly, a libelous accusation without evidence.

> When someone accuses an organization of corruption, he should provide evidence, not just a video, especially if he/she/it and under the table corrupting the members to buy Votes.

I’ve made no videos, so I can only assume you are referring to someone else here… Perhaps yourself?

> If you think the misquotes you sent before are convincing, maybe to your good self, but not to me and i did not reply as I usualy say what i want and walk, reason being I have no time to waste on endless discussions as the 2nd party is very sure is justifying a wrong cause.

What misquote, exactly? Please point to where my quote was in error and be specific.

I literally copied and pasted the text of section 6 of the bylaws.

> By the way, I did not mention anyone in my email except PTA so which company you are talking about?!

I was talking about you and the misinformation contained in your statements. I thought that was clear from the context.

Owen

> 
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 5:11 PM Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com <mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Jun 14, 2022, at 14:32 , Amin Dayekh <admin at megamore.ng <mailto:admin at megamore.ng>> wrote:
>> 
>> Dear members, 
>> my attention was drawn to another misleading video of known sources who are taking maliciously all steps against the Members of AfriNIC and AfriNIC.
>> 
>> in the Video I noticed a misleading statement about the "Government of Pakistan" but when i paused and looked at the document it is the Pakistan tELECOM authority and not the government itself.
>> 
>> I am writing this post following an email sent to the Pakistan telecommunication Authority aka PTA, through their website to: 
>> 
>> a- ask, have you really drafted and sent that letter?
>> b- inquire, on what basis have you sent that letter? have you at least communicated with AFRINIC TO HEAR THEIR PART OF THE STORY?
>> c- raise a solid query with regards to their breach of our sovereignty as an African continent, Regions, Countries, and Nations through the alleged Letter sent to the government of Mauritius in support of a fraudulent misleading organization requiring some details on how Africa's IPV4 addresses ended and are in USE in Pakistan, which, as per the last time I checked, is not an African country.
> 
> Misleading? As in the misleading claim that AFRINIC issued addresses are somehow restricted to use in Africa when nothing in the bylaws, RSA, or CPM says so?
> 
> You continue to repeat this claim despite repeated clarifications and corrections on the fallacious nature of the claim. Clearly, you are the one engaged in a campaign of disinformation.
> 
> Owen
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220615/6452d090/attachment.html>