Unfortunately or fortunately(choose one that fits) he is still here. :-) Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos Every word has consequences. Every silence does too!
On Sun, 25 Sep 2022, 18:09 Dr Eberhard W Lisse, <[email protected]> wrote: > And I had so hoped he had gone away. > > el > On 25. Sep 2022, 17:23 +0200, Y Mshana <[email protected]>, wrote: > > Oh no! Not again after all those years.. > 🤯 > > On Thu, 22 Sep 2022, 15:59 Dr Eberhard W Lisse, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Some thoughts on the session: >> >> Basically most of the session time was wasted with >> approximately 10 addresses by the usual suspects all of which >> had the same content, namely exactly zero. >> >> This is not new, it has been unchanged approximately since I >> have attended the first meeting many years ago. >> >> The only exception was Alan Barrett who then however faced >> headwind for making the practical and good suggestion of >> clients to engage their providers if and when these do not >> provide Universal Access. >> >> Several speakers (in particular the (outgoing African) Board >> Members who should have ample opportunity to actually do >> something about it (but NEVER do)) pontificated about how >> important it would be to have ICANN Meetings in Africa. >> >> While I am all in favor of that, in particular in Namibia, the >> Chair wasted the opportunity to engage ICANN's CEO on this, >> which had to be done by Sébastien Bachollet and even in >> English, pointing out that one of the reasons to create the >> smaller ICANN (policy) meetings was to have reduced >> requirements in oder to be able to hold meetings in developing >> countries. >> >> Of course he was fobbed off, and, in a manner which I consider >> bordering the line of ICANN's Standards of Acceptable >> Behavior. >> >> The point is not that we need to have meetings in all ICANN >> regions and in particular in Africa, which we do, and we all >> know that, the question is why ICANN is not doing it or >> anything about it? >> >> Well, I think, this is because the "paying" stakeholders do >> not wish to meet in less than 5 star environments close to >> major airports, let alone transit. >> >> This US-centricity which is patently obvious in so many ICANN >> aspects is, in my view, not compatible with the multi >> stakeholder model. >> >> Fortunately there was no time to review or even debate the >> "statement", which mostly nobody reads, but most certainly is >> never acted upon. >> >> greetings, el >> -- >> Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist >> [email protected] / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell) >> PO Box 8421 Bachbrecht \ / If this email is signed with GPG/PGP >> 10007, Namibia ;____/ Sect 20 of Act No 4 of 2019 may apply >> >> _______________________________________________ >> AfrICANN mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/africann >> > _______________________________________________ > AfrICANN mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/africann >
_______________________________________________ AfrICANN mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/africann
