2015-03-25 21:38 GMT+04:00 S Moonesamy <sm+mu_at_elandsys.com>:
>
> Having a government funded body changes the neutral status of the proposed
> body. After reading the above and the draft again I noticed that the draft
> does not propose having a neutral non-profit as the ccTLD manager.
>
> At the beginning of this month you commented that you would not agree to
> .mu being managed by a company similar to MCML. In the above you agreed to
> .mu being managed by the government.
>
Indeed, that appears contradictory. I meant government-funded but not
government-managed. Though I don't know to what extent that could be
possible.
Otherwise, we'll have to adjust the costs to cater for the board expenses.
This would however cause inconveniences (in terms of expense) with a larger
board.
Regards,
Ish Sookun
*- Geek by birth, Linux by choice.*
* +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+*
* |H|A|C|K|L|O|G|.|i|n|*
* +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ *
*
https://twitter.com/IshSookun <
https://twitter.com/IshSookun> ^^ Do you
tweet?*
Received on Wed Mar 25 2015 - 18:01:44 PST