Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[rpd] Anti-Shutdown

Bill Woodcock woody at
Sat Jun 10 12:49:10 UTC 2017

> On Jun 10, 2017, at 4:53 AM, abel ELITCHA <kmw.elitcha at> wrote:
> You seem to be stretching the truth.  

At the risk of belaboring the pointless, can you specify what truth or truths you think I’m taking liberties with?

> Internet shutdown is not  a new topic and not the first time UN and other bodies dicuss it. 

I agree on both points, though I said nothing with regard to either.

> We may also diverge on  the impact of the succession  of events which occurred during  the whole discussion. 

I said nothing about the succession of events.  I said there was a discussion scheduled for an upcoming UN meeting.  By definition, anything that’s upcoming succeeds anything that’s already occurred.  I should think this an uncontroversial assertion.

> I consider the afrinic  board statement[1], the panel discussion during AIS2017  and the AF* statement [2] to have more Impact  as  they created conditions for appropriate discussions, multi-stakeholders  engagement for better outcomes.

Although I have no idea whether they will have had “more impact” than a discussion which has yet to occur, I agree that they had a favorable impact, and observed that “it’s been incredibly valuable to have the conversation, and that having [had] the conversation has drawn favorable attention to… Africa.”  Are we somehow in disagreement?

I’m not sure what folks are interested in arguing about here…  I merely pointed out that the UN had scheduled a discussion of a topic which AfriNIC members had been discussing.  That’s a simple statement of fact.  If you don’t want them to talk about it, arguing at me about it has no effect; I have no influence over their process.


More information about the RPD mailing list