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

[rpd] Two more petitioners

Jackson Muthili jacksonmuthi at
Tue Dec 19 07:37:57 UTC 2017

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 12:55 AM, Andrew Alston
<Andrew.Alston at> wrote:
> While I am sorely tempted to respond point to point in your email and give
> you a lesson in facts - I will not dignify this nonesense with such.

You are the convener of opposers. I am open to read those facts.

> I will however say this - this is the second time you have introduced a
> racially biased context into the PDP - and discounted the will of a
> significant portion of the member base - based of blatant unsubstantiated
> and inaccurate prejudice

Thank you for the comment.

The operative words in your comments are :- THE WILL OF A SIGNIFICANT

You see this is where the crux of your argument lies and where the problem is.

In your other email you state this same notion that those opposing
contribute 30% of AfriNIC revenue.

- AfriNIC is a non profit company managing a critical resource (IPs)
that is the engine of the internet which the UN already declared a
basic human right.
- Because of this very nature AfriNIC cant  sell IPs to highest
bidders in an open market when those highest bidders pay the most
revenue. Otherwise yes I will state again that if this was the case
South Africa as the strongest economy (or one of the strongest) would
just buy off AfriNIC and its miniature IPs and game closed.
- You ostentatiously state that every country should be heard equally.
Thank you for ignoring the fact that the internet penetration rates
and state of the economy in South Africa (where you have convened the
largest opposition) - although it can be better - is light years ahead
of the other 53 African economies whose interests this policy proposal
is trying to protect. To burry your head in the sand and ignore these
realities does not take them away.


More information about the RPD mailing list