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

Mon Jun 20 07:04:00 UTC 2022

wen, the discussion is not about the board, the emails are very clear, and
read well. A bribe is a criminal offense, and so is offering a bribe,
multiple offenses can amount to conspiracy. My disagreements with the board
and AfriNIC were addressed through correct channels, ethically,
objectively, and professionally. If we don't see changes, there are ways we
can follow as members from within AfriNIC and not through the courts.

On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 7:12 AM Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Jun 19, 2022, at 06:25 , Amin Dayekh <admin at megamore.ng> wrote:
>
> The discussion here is not about the board.
>
>
> It is as far as I am concerned.
>
>

>
>
Don't confuse Ethical/unethical conduct, with acts against the law.
>
>
> The board has committed both.
>
> To the best of my knowledge, NRS has committed only unethical/immoral and
> not illegal acts.
>
> Offering bribes to influence the outcome of the elections endangers our
> role as members, questions the integrity of the nominee by such
> organization using bribe and defamation to take control of AfriNic while
> fighting it on the other hand,
>
>
> To the best of my knowledge, NRS has no open litigation against AFRINIC,
> so I’m not sure what you mean here.
>
> How members are getting onboarded to such organization? by giving them
> ipv4 /24 pool and as stated by them (worth 1500$) free of charge and they
> can use it for as long as the owner doesn't want it for the mean time. This
> pool of ipv4 is given to encourage people to:
> - join the organization
> - sign NDA
> - sign a petition against afrinic “ the context then was loss of trust”
> - sign documents to transfer your ip resources to RIPE NCC
>
>
> I have no idea. I have no relationship with NRS.
>
> Microsoft took immediate steps to regain the public image and maybe still
> working on that, we never heard of Microsoft bribing members of Apnic to
> put a board of directors in Apnic to act as their minions.
>
>
> There are still open questions around the ethics of how Microsoft managed
> to “comply” with ARIN policies in justifying the need for the IPv4
> addresses they acquired from Nortel.
>
> The practice is questionable and doubtful as well as the intentions, why
> would someone spend this amount of money to win an election to board ? If
> you say to make changes fir the (transparency and accountability) etc  I
> would say baby-girls believe in unicorns and a few until they are 18, just
> like how we all believed once (because of media) that there is a superhero
> somewhere called Superman.
>
>
> Again, you should ask the NRS directly. As I said, I have no affiliation
> with NRS.
>
> Owen
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2022 at 7:21 PM Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Jun 18, 2022, at 04:51, Amin Dayekh <admin at megamore.ng> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Dont forget that the acts are related directly and simultaneously to
>> their allegations.
>>
>>
>> As I have previously stated… I have no affiliation with NRS and find
>> their conduct to be both immoral and unethical.
>>
>> Nonetheless, that does not change the fact that the board has repeatedly
>> acted against the bylaws, the RSA, the CPM, and the companies act.
>>
>> Simply because one (of many) accusers has acted unethically does not
>> invalidate the voracity of their claims when there is additional clear
>> evidence and testimony from other independent sources.
>>
>> It is a course of time and good conduct that takes the enterprise to
>> prove their good standing and change the general perception.
>>
>>
>> Which I have. I know my opinions are not popular in recent history, but I
>> am continuing to strive for an open, transparent, and accountable AFRINIC
>> administered according to its governing documents and the law in the
>> interests of its community and its members.
>>
>> You can choose to believe that or not. I have a long history of activism
>> in the RIR system. When I started struggling for provider independent IPv6
>> assignments and allocations, that was not a popular view, either. Now it is
>> policy in all 5 RIRs.
>>
>> Anyways I wish you well.
>>
>>
>> Likewise. I hope you will keep an open mind and judge AFRINIC’s conduct
>> on its merits rather than on your opinion of one (or even a few) of its
>> detractors. There are real problems here that need to be solved. The sooner
>> the community and the members can come to agreement around that instead of
>> using the noise around the conduct of some of the entities pointing these
>> things out, the better for everyone.
>>
>> Solve the real central problems and most of the noise will fall away very
>> quickly.
>>
>> Owen
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 18, 2022 at 11:06 AM Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 18, 2022, at 00:26 , Amin Dayekh <admin at megamore.ng> wrote:
>>>
>>> You answered yes to my question, whereby I asked clearly rephrased here:
>>> a company offering bribe to people to vote in their favor, will this
>>> company be in a lny good standing or credible to talk about corruption
>>> again?
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>> Are you sure?
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>> Just because a company has committed some bad acts does not mean that
>>> every thing they say can be discounted or regarded as non-credible.
>>>
>>> If such were the case, nobody would ever buy Microsoft products, for
>>> after all, that company is a convicted felon.
>>>
>>> The California PUC regularly listens to PG&E despite their numerous
>>> felony convictions as a company.
>>>
>>>
>>> Owen, if I ask you today to take $100 to vote for me in the upcoming
>>> election in Camaros to be MP, and after a few days you see me in the news
>>> lecturing about corruption and pointing fingers at people whom i am
>>> labeling as corrupted, that is ok by you and you will accept my word?
>>>
>>>
>>> It is certainly OK by me.
>>>
>>> Whether or not I will accept your word will depend on a great many
>>> factors not in evidence in the current discussion, so I cannot give a
>>> certain answer to that last question, which is pretty much what I said in
>>> the previous response below.
>>>
>>> Owen
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 18, 2022 at 8:19 AM Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jun 18, 2022, at 00:00 , Amin Dayekh <admin at megamore.ng> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Good Morning Owen,
>>>>
>>>> There is something i wanted to ask you about, but please give me a
>>>> short answer and straight forward:
>>>>
>>>> In your opinion, an organization that is offering bribe to people in
>>>> order to get their votes, in order to influence the outcome of the
>>>> elections to her favor in Camaros, - will that organization be trustworthy ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> With the limited information in your question, it’s impossible to form
>>>> a complete opinion, but probably not.
>>>>
>>>> - Will that organization have any right again to lecture about
>>>> corruption while it is promoting the culture of corruption (allegedly as
>>>> per above if it is true)?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes.
>>>>
>>>> - will you trust any word from that organization?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Unknown, insufficient data provided.
>>>>
>>>> - will you have faith and rely on their intensions that they are
>>>> upright?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I rarely have faith or rely on upright intentions of any organization.
>>>>
>>>> I am not pointing any finger at you , rather i am just seeking your
>>>> opinion pls.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My opinion is mostly unformed as insufficient data is given in your
>>>> question.
>>>>
>>>> Owen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jun 18, 2022 at 7:30 AM Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 16, 2022, at 22:26 , Amin Dayekh <admin at megamore.ng> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not replying to this news paper, nor I have time to read it all.
>>>>>
>>>>> I will also ask you to remember your statement here, ( the resource
>>>>> holder are pushing for a transfer policy) i will also prove you wrong!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I look forward to your attempt to do so.
>>>>>
>>>>> I find it amusing how you have cherry picked what you respond to while
>>>>> ignoring the most salient points in the prior messages to the point where
>>>>> when I limit it to the salient points, you choose to ignore the entire
>>>>> message rather than make a cogent response.
>>>>>
>>>>> Owen
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 4:40 AM Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jun 15, 2022, at 12:00 , Amin Dayekh <admin at megamore.ng> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Owen,
>>>>>> for the sake of time, I will quote and reply and highlighted in red
>>>>>> from your ext
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *quote: ( Because many resource holders wish to be able to sell their
>>>>>> underutilized resources in a worldwide secondary market. ) *you used
>>>>>> the term sell, in another reply you denied selling, anyway whatever the
>>>>>> term is, this should be governed by the rir, there should be an application
>>>>>> with the knowledge of the rir and justification of the use, just like when
>>>>>> you apply to RIR directly, not an unmonitored process. Let me remind us
>>>>>> here of the difference between inter-rir and LIR to another member. this
>>>>>> step was taken by many rir "inter rir transfer" who own majority of the
>>>>>> IPV4, and to regulate the transfers and continue to monitor the ipv4,
>>>>>> closing the door on black and grey market. let me remind us also that such
>>>>>> cases peculiar to need and in cases of bankruptcy or whatever reason the
>>>>>> company might be dissolved. Also let me remind us all the ip resources are
>>>>>> assigned "not sold" to lir based on NEED, justified need.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Neither Larus nor Cloud Innovation is selling resources received from
>>>>>> AFRINIC… I stated that many other resource holders wish to do so and that
>>>>>> is one of the reasons that those resource holders are pushing for a
>>>>>> transfer policy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is not inconsistent, it is your inability to differentiate
>>>>>> and/or your failure to look past your efforts to ascribe the most sinister
>>>>>> possible motives to every statement I make.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The RIR doesn’t govern anything. The community governs the RIR and
>>>>>> the RIR is supposed to administer the registry according to the policies
>>>>>> set by the community and according to its bylaws which are controlled by
>>>>>> the membership of the RIR.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps it is this fundamental misunderstanding of who is
>>>>>> specifically supposed to be empowered in the governance of the internet and
>>>>>> as a result the RIRs that is driving some of your other misstatements.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For clarity:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ICANN/PTI in its role performing the IANA operates the central
>>>>>> registry for IPv4 addresses, IPv6 addresses, and ASNs (among other things).
>>>>>> It does so according to global policies which are set by the RIRs acting in
>>>>>> concert through the Address Supporting Organization, specifically the ASO
>>>>>> AC, which is synonymous with the NRO NC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Each RIR receives resources from the IANA central registry according
>>>>>> to its justified need and pursuant to those policies mentioned above.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Each RIR distributes those resources to its subscribers (members or
>>>>>> not, depending on the RIR’s specific policies) according to the policies
>>>>>> set in the RIR by its community and according to the bylaws of the RIR set
>>>>>> by its members.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Each RIR is expected to operate within the policies created by its
>>>>>> membership and according to its bylaws. When an RIR fails to do so, it
>>>>>> becomes far more dangerous than is expected.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some RIR subscribers are LIRs (Local Internet Registries). LIRs
>>>>>> provide address space to their customers (usually for a fee) whether in
>>>>>> relationship with connectivity services or as a separate product.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some RIR subscribers are end users and simply use the address space
>>>>>> they receive from the RIR directly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Every RIR except AFRINIC has an inter-RIR transfer policy at this
>>>>>> point. Yes, the recipient needs to show need in the case of an inter-RIR
>>>>>> transfer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are many different reasons organizations want to be able to
>>>>>> engage in inter-RIR transfers and I enumerated several of them. You chose
>>>>>> to focus on a single one because that is the one you hope to be able to
>>>>>> twist into something sinister.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> quote: ( *.... 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.) *Answer: AfriNIC
>>>>>> got the smallest portion of ipv4 and it is called AFRICAN etc... enforcing
>>>>>> a policy "which does not exist as of now" to transfer inter RIR or sell
>>>>>> will be suicide to the continent's digital future as the world is at the
>>>>>> scarcity of IPV4, my view. Rather, Auditing the existing delegations and
>>>>>> retrieval is what is supposed to happen. in the meantime, the companies you
>>>>>> are referring to are companies of legitimate presence, not ip brokers and
>>>>>> have ASNs. What is applicable to RIPE or ARIN is not necessarily applicable
>>>>>> to AfriNIC, they can enforce any policy and afrinic is at liberty to do
>>>>>> such, with the view of the little ip resources available and the big future
>>>>>> of Africa.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you are opposed to an inter-RIR transfer policy, then so be it.
>>>>>> That has little or nothing to do with whether or not existing addresses
>>>>>> registered to an organization by AFRINIC are allowed to be used outside of
>>>>>> AFRICA or not.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, the policy that does exist now clearly does allow AFRINIC
>>>>>> addresses to be utilized out of region virtually without restriction. A
>>>>>> plain text reading of section 6 of the bylaws makes this quite clear. A
>>>>>> plain text reading of the CPM finds only one place where this is
>>>>>> contradicted and it applies ONLY to addresses issued after the activation
>>>>>> of the Soft Landing policy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you want to conduct legitimate audits, feel free. If you wish to
>>>>>> abide by the legitimate outcome of those audits when they show legitimate
>>>>>> utilization according to the CPM, the RSA, and the bylaws, I’ll fully
>>>>>> support that. However, use out of region does not violate any of the terms
>>>>>> in any of those documents unless the addresses were issued to the
>>>>>> organization after the activation of the soft landing policy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> AFRINIC is free to enforce any policy which has been adopted by the
>>>>>> community and ratified by the board. There is no policy restricting the
>>>>>> location of utilization of addresses which meets that test at this time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *quote: (AFRINIC has not won or last any cases yet regarding the
>>>>>> geographical restriction of IP Utilization. This is more misinformation
>>>>>> from you.)* I did not make any statement about winning on
>>>>>> geographical grounds, why are you putting words in my mouth that I did not
>>>>>> say? who is misinforming now?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You stated: "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. “
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your claim is that AFRINIC should have already lost all cases on
>>>>>> geographic basis if my statement was true. I pointed out that AFRINIC has
>>>>>> neither lost nor won because the cases that relate to this matter have not
>>>>>> yet concluded. I did not put words in your mouth, I responded to what you
>>>>>> actually said.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> quote : (....soft landing) Soft landing was very good in other rir if
>>>>>> you really wish to compare, refer to ARIN website and see how soft landing
>>>>>> was easy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ARIN never passed a soft landing policy and it worked out quite well
>>>>>> there, IMHO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, the only mention I have made regarding soft landing in any
>>>>>> of these statements is to mention that it is the only policy with
>>>>>> geographical restrictions on utilization codified in the policy. I’ve also
>>>>>> pointed out that said policy does not apply to any addresses issued to
>>>>>> Cloud Innovation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *quote : ( 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.)*
>>>>>> did i say you? did i point any finger to you? why are you always whining
>>>>>> and dtrying to get in the center of attention as if the whole world is
>>>>>> revolving because of you and around you? I said : *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),
>>>>>> did you see you or me or owen or amin in this statement?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You made the following direct statement in a message sent directly to
>>>>>> me as well as an open list:
>>>>>> "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)”
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In context, it is quite clear you were intending to level this as a
>>>>>> direct accusation towards me. Your use of weasel words and attempted
>>>>>> evasions notwithstanding, at least I have the courage to own what I say and
>>>>>> take responsibility for it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *quote: ( 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. ) *Again:
>>>>>> Did I say you published any video? did I point any finger at you? did I
>>>>>> mention you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You said: "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.”
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You said this in an email directed to me and copied to an open list.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So in effect, yes, you did claim I published a video, you did point a
>>>>>> finger presumably at me, and by having my name as the target of your email,
>>>>>> yes, you did mention me for all practical purposes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My email was about PTA, our legal team communicated with them on
>>>>>> their website in Pakistan and the Website of the Embassy in Mauritius and
>>>>>> through a Letter TO THE embassy here, and will send further to the
>>>>>> embassies/commission/high commission/consulate (if any) in all African
>>>>>> Region, so may I understand what involved you here? Are you from Pakistan
>>>>>> or the spokesperson of PTA?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In terms of the subsequent emails in this discussion, you put my name
>>>>>> in the To: field of your email. If you didn’t intend to involve me, why did
>>>>>> you do so?
>>>>>> In terms of the original message, you made a public comment about the
>>>>>> letter being sent on behalf of a “fraudulent and misleading organization”,
>>>>>> so I felt obliged to point out your own misleading information that you
>>>>>> have attempted to promulgate in this same forum and with your own misguided
>>>>>> and misleading video.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will note, that you did not address the following component of my
>>>>>> previous message:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To which I responded:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You carefully avoided answering this… Is it perhaps because you have
>>>>>> no answer here? You could not find an actual misquote?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I find three messages into this conversation that this statement: "I
>>>>>> have no time to waste on endless discussions as the 2nd party is very sure
>>>>>> is justifying a wrong cause.”
>>>>>> is truly telling as apparently I am not such a second party and
>>>>>> therefore perhaps you are admitting by your actions that I do not actually
>>>>>> have a wrong cause. If so, this is progress.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Owen
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 6:31 PM Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Jun 14, 2022, at 14:32 , Amin Dayekh <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/20220620/9ecc2991/attachment-0001.html>