Hi Jean-Philippe,
I'll copy my message to the mailing list.
I understand that it can a lot of time to understand the discussion
on this mailing list.
It is not unusual for a government to push its ideas and
objectives. The approach of having a consultation to have a global
vision without having to apply that might work for cases where only
Mauritius is involved. That may not work well for decisions where
the term "local internet community" or "internet community" are
used. Unfortunately, the government and the large businesses in
Mauritius do not have an understanding of how policy-making for the
internet works.
The idea of creating an association based on the membership of the
mailing list was suggested last year when there were only a few
subscribers. The only two persons who showed interest at that time
was Ish Sookun and I. I think that it is worthwhile to consider
whether to regroup as an association.
I like the idea of "faire un dossier de presse" to explain the issues
to the media. I am favour of having the policies regarding the .mu
ccTLD based on consensus. What seems to happening currently is to
have an entity where the users and small businesses will not have
much of a say. I do not think that we should remain docile about this.
Mr Sookun made the following comment in a message to the mailing list:
"The people from the Government seem to agree that "govmu.org"
isn't aesthetic.
They discomfort is clearly seen."
I have yet to see a technical analysis from the government or anyone
else about that. The comments I have heard about .mu and gov.mu
(outside this mailing list) leads me to conclude that there is a lack
of knowledge about domain names. This morning, I explained to
someone that changing a domain name is not as easy as it sounds and
pointed out that there was a case of "gov.mu" being used in an
official government document.
I came across the following yesterday:
http://csd.pmo.govmu.org/English/registration/Pages/birth.aspx You
may notice that "www.gov.mu" is mentioned four times on that web
page. It seems that people being paid to fix that are not interested
in doing it and everyone else is docile about that.
I have some concerns about the .mu-related decisions as they are
based on a poor analysis of the issues. The problem mentioned in
your message is the type of problem which should not be
happening. Yet, it is happening and nobody has raised any public
objection about it.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
Received on Wed Apr 22 2015 - 21:53:26 PST