April 2012 - KICTANet

identity.go.ke still not working
by Warigia Bowman 24 Apr '12

24 Apr '12

Dear colleagues, It has been over 6 months since I wrote about this last, yet my sister still does not have an identity card (It has taken over a year and a half, and no results). In addition, the website of identity.go.ke does not come up, and as you can see below, the email of the director is still bouncing. Maybe there is a new website. If so, please let me know. Sigh. Kibaki comes from my home area of Othaya, and I think that efficiency has increased in some areas. That being said, we have some work to do. Furthermore, as a political scientist/public policy person, it strikes me that perhaps we see greater efficiency in areas used by the elite, (i.e. passports) and lesser efficiency in areas used by wananchi, because wananchi have less political capital. Thoughts? Sincerely, Warigia ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <mailer-daemon(a)googlemail.com> Date: Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:34 AM Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure) To: warigia(a)gmail.com Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently: director(a)identity.go.ke Technical details of permanent failure: Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the recipient domain. We recommend contacting the other email provider for further information about the cause of this error. The error that the other server returned was: 530 530 5.7.1 Client was not authenticated (state 12). ----- Original message ----- DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=+pylQ0FXNnR1O3triV8F9yhxw4f66aQH/BO/X0gmVlg=; b=Do/4A1rELvXoBSp8wuIEhRTtaLD/QiUig+l86uj0SGYUqsCY7CeCM9jcQJYOeh2HeL 0c4eXzoRijYIRumSDny392peMgXNs+E0CaxNUn9HmzlkkmEnv6lhL5onL5ARuMDseqqD 89uMyAxVlzlZBDHGtpE03YxqQdxKCjKgK5DSJr/SzdOKjsBnQztpAiapSlTd1ZT/ieoR QL57Aybq9LG7u8H9LfLeplOtopTriiSa7gklveHkQkE/fxHIm4FaUXfyWIghWPxFbolk p/slUT3aUBmIXKZYrNooCO/+x33s7X1VZgfVxfjCYOGNJq3XXy7EEn+qS4vszbY4Ad+y g85Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.174.42 with SMTP id bp10mr13593162obc.54.1335278087383; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 07:34:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.116.197 with HTTP; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 07:34:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: < CACeY99S6AhGW8HXq_SS3ui_ZvdNWOooDQuroOsYAWjf-YLXXmg(a)mail.gmail.com> References: < CACeY99S6AhGW8HXq_SS3ui_ZvdNWOooDQuroOsYAWjf-YLXXmg(a)mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 09:34:47 -0500 Message-ID: < CACeY99TtrehwSvivytr1NfiLS0rtZdoVcg6Tn-Z3NcprPX6eXg(a)mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: identity.go.ke not working, reprise From: Warigia Bowman <warigia(a)gmail.com> To: Bitange Ndemo <bndemo(a)information.go.ke>, bitange(a)jambo.co.ke, joecketer(a)yahoo.co.uk, director(a)identity.go.ke Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f642a68132cdb04be6da86f Dear Secretary Keter and PS Ndemo. Hope you are very well. I was wondering if you have any update on my sister's identity card? Identity.go.ke still does not appear to be working. It is over 6 months since I last wrote you. Many thanks, Warigia Bowman ********************************************************* > > Dear Secretary Keter > > Thank you for your kind reply. > > What I have with me is the waiting card for my sister Patricia Njeri. Her > address at the time she applied was P.O. Box 145 Othaya. > > The waiting card was stamped 154 Municipality Div. Nyeri District. > > Is this sufficient information, or do you need additional information> > > Sincerely Yours, Warigia > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 3:07 PM, <Joseph.Keter(a)kenya.go.ke> wrote: > > > Dear Wariga, > > > > We are in receipt of your concerns on challenges you faced in monitoring > > status of processing of national identity card of Patricia Njeri > Wairimu. We > > shall appreciate if you could give us more particulars especially the > > station where Patricia applied for her identity card. Please send her > > details to director(a)identity.go.ke for further necessary action. > > > > Regards. > > Mr Joseph K. Keter > > ndc(K) > > Senior Deputy Secretary, > > Ministry of State for Immigration & Registration of Persons, > > Nyayo House,20th Floor, > > P.O. Box 30395-00100, > > Nairobi, Kenya. > > Phone : +254202222022 > > Tel/Fax: +254202229349 > > Mobile : +254722135090 > > Email : joecketer(a)yahoo.co.uk > > Website:www.mirp.go.ke > > > > -- Dr. Warigia Bowman Assistant Professor Clinton School of Public Service University of Arkansas 1200 President Clinton Ave. Sturgis Hall Little Rock, AR 72201 501-683-5227 wbowman(a)clintonschool.uasys.edu http://democratizingegypt.blogspot.com -- Dr. Warigia Bowman Assistant Professor Clinton School of Public Service University of Arkansas 1200 President Clinton Ave. Sturgis Hall Little Rock, AR 72201 501-683-5227 wbowman(a)clintonschool.uasys.edu http://democratizingegypt.blogspot.com

1 0

CCK Should Provide Tools for Service Monitoring
by Muchiri Nyaggah 24 Apr '12

24 Apr '12

I've given up on my ISP. I am currently receiving 1/16th of the advertised bandwidth according to various independent tests. Even for a shared connection this is outrageous. They insist that I should only use their tool to measure my provisioned bandwidth, a tool that measures speeds between my premises and theirs. A pointless exercise since I subscribed to Internet services not a local loop connection. Now if the CCK could provide consumers with an online tool to measure what they are actually receiving, as well as compelling ISPs to clearly state the performance limitations of their service, we would all make informed decisions on who to purchase Internet services from. Is this within the regulator's mandate? Muchiri. ******* Sent from my Android device

3 2

PRESS RELEASE ON FIXING OF PRICES
by Wambua, Christopher 24 Apr '12

24 Apr '12

PRESS RELEASE 23rd April 2012 Listers CCK's response to media reports on alleged collusion to fix retail mobile voice prices The attention of the Communications Commission of Kenya (CCK) has been drawn to media reports alleging a plan to fix retail voice tariffs by a section of the mobile service providers ostensibly with tacit approval of CCK. The CCK wishes to state as follows: 1. CCK considers the retail mobile voice market as sufficiently competitive, thus making it unnecessary to impose any stringent retail price regulatory obligations on the licensed mobile operators. However, even for such competitive market segments where the Commission does not impose retail price setting obligations, the law (i.e. clause 4(3) of the Kenya Information and Communications (Tariff) Regulations, 2010,) prohibits licensees from applying tariffs that distort competition, exploit consumers and, possibly even prevent market entry. 2. Therefore, all mobile operators set their retail prices independently guided primarily by their costs of providing a particular service and are only obligated to file with the Commission their retail rates as provided for in their respective licences. 3. While the CCK recently held discussions with some licensees regarding the wholesale interconnection rate and the attendant glide path, no request has been officially made regarding the intention to fix the retail mobile voice tariff either by those players on any other licensee. As such, no such approval has been granted. 4. Retail price fixing as practiced in collusive oligopoly markets is an anti-competitive business practice that is contrary to the prevailing competition law and policy. Retail price fixing in the mobile voice market in Kenya would, therefore, be in breach of the law; and as such no approval can be granted. 5. The Commission is currently carrying out a study to evaluate the impact of competition on the mobile voice market on the entire economy. We would like to clarify that the study, which is being undertaken by the Kenya Institute of Public Policy Research and Analysis (KIPPRA), is in not in any way meant to determine interconnection rates for the mobile telecoms market. Issued by Francis W. Wangusi Ag. Director-General

1 0

Here are #Startups that Would Do Best Without Venture Capital" by @DanShapiro
by Agosta Liko 24 Apr '12

24 Apr '12

http://fi.co/posts/568 'Here are #Startups that Would Do Best Without Venture Capital" by @DanShapiro <http://fi.co/posts/568> *Founder Feedback gives you insights from the startup trenches.* *In a post on his *blog <http://danshapiro.com/>*,** Dan Shapiro, former Founder & CEO of Sparkbuy (acquired by Google) and Ontela (merged with Photobucket)**, and **Founder Institute Mentor**, **explains the types of companies and entrepreneurs who should not raise venture capital. It is a very insightful article on how venture capitalists think that may not be obvious to many entrepreneurs. * *Dan will be speaking at tomorrow's Founder Showcase<http://foundershowcase.com/>event in San Francisco. There are still a few tickets remaining, and over 100 investors will be in attendance, so register today<http://foundershowcase.com/tickets> .* This post originally appeared on DanShapiro.com here<http://www.danshapiro.com/blog/2012/01/companies-that-would-do-best-without…>. Below it is republished. "I just got the following email. *Subject: Small taxi company looking to expand* *Hello,* *I run a small taxi company outside of Boston Massachusetts. My community has been targeted for casino development and I am looking to expand my business. Could you possibly provide some advice on how to find venture capital?* * * For someone who lives in the startup world, this looks pretty silly. But I’m sure I’d say a lot of silly things if I were getting in to the taxi business, too. So I figured I’d point him to a simple explanation of why taxi companies (actually, services companies in general) aren’t appropriate for VC. I did the Google thing for a bit to find a good article. And no luck. Well, you know what they say: when the internet fails you, make more internet. Here, then, are a very good set of reasons not to take venture capital (or – why venture capital won’t take you). *1. You want to build a profitable company* First day of Founder's Institute I ask how many people want to raise venture capital. Most of the hands go up. I then ask who wants to build a profitable company. Again, most hands go up. The funny thing about this is – VCs don’t actually like their companies to be profitable. Someday, sure, but not on their watch. You see, profitability means that the company *wont grow any faster*. This seems odd, but think about this for a minute. At the early stages, a company may be making money, but it’s almost certainly investing every penny it makes back in to the business. If it has access to outside capital (e.g. a VCs), it’s investing *more* than it makes. And that’s exactly what VCs like: companies that can grow at amazing speed, and never slow down their burn rate to amass cash. They like this for two reasons. First, VCs want to invest in companies that can grow explosively. That means huge markets, executives who can scale up a business fast, and a willingness on the part of management to double down on a winning bet – over, and over, and over again. Second, because it means the company *keeps coming back to the VC for more money*on positive terms. That means the VC keeps getting to buy more and more of the growing concern. Of course, this is something of an over-broad generalization. I’m required to include one per post or I lose my startup blogging license. In fact many venture backed companies are profitable, it’s very impressive to bootstrap your company to profitability in a few months before raising outside investment, etc. But if you are excited about a profitable business that can cut you giant dividend checks (not that most VCs can even accept divided checks - long story), realize that VCs will not be pleased with that approach to running the business. They will want you to plow those earnings back in to the business. And when the day comes that a VC-backed business generates cash faster than it can effectively spend it? They sell the company, or IPO (which is technically also selling the company), or replace the CEO with someone who can spend faster. A taxi business should be run for profits. That’s not VC style. *2. Your business has reasonable margins* As a general rule, VCs don’t like reasonable margins. They are exclusively interested in *outrageous* margins. Ludicrous margins. We’re talking about sneering at 50%, and hoping for 80%, 90%, crazy astronomy stuff. Venture capital is all about investing a little bit of money to create a business with massive scale and huge multiples – investing tens of millions to build software that then can be duplicated or served up for virtually nothing extra per-person with a total market size of billions. In particular, VCs don’t like businesses that are people-powered. Software businesses are awesome, but their evil twin – software consultancies – are near-pariah to VCs. If adding revenue means adding bodies, they don’t like it. In fact, enterprise software companies, which can tread a fine line between software consulting & software development, sometimes get really creative <http://kellblog.com/2011/06/27/why-palantir-makes-my-head-hurt/>to come down on the right side of the line. So the rule of thumb is that VCs like product companies: software, drugs, cleantech, and so on. And they don’t like the manufacturing, service industry, and consulting businesses that often are just a tiny shift of business model away. Every new taxi requires a… well, a new taxi. And a new taxi driver. Not the right business for VC. *3. You are going to double your investors’ money* I’ve covered this before, but VCs really don’t want to double their money<http://www.danshapiro.com/blog/2010/08/vc-insanity-economics/>. Strange though it sounds, their economics make that look like a failure. They need to target a 10x return on their investment, and that means – depending on stage and fund size – that you company has to grow to somewhere in the hundreds-of-millions to billions range to be interesting. That means taking your taxi business from $20MM in annual revenue to $40MM just doesn’t do it for them. Particularly because the valuation multiples on the aforementioned lower-margin businesses are smaller. *4. VCs probably don’t want to invest in you* Here are the people VCs *really love* to invest in: - Entrepreneurs who’ve already made them lots of money - Their closest buddies Here are the people who VCs *can be convinced* to invest in: - People who have been wildly successful at high-profile past jobs that are related to their new business (e.g. a former executive VP at a Fortune 500 company, inventor of thingamajig that everyone knows) - New graduates from top-of-the-top tier schools who have built something amazingly cool already - Extremely charismatic type-A personalities Anyone else is possible, but our taxi driver is going to have a devil of a time. *5. You have better things to do with 9 months, and you will probably fail* That’s how long it took me to do my Series A for Ontela. 9 months before the first check came in. Average is 6-12. That’s because a busy VC will look at a few companies a day, and will make a few investments a year. The math says the hit rate is well under 1%. That matches my experience – I pitched over 100 times during our Series A investment. Not only that, but most of the companies pitching the same events and people that I saw worked just as hard as I did, and did not get funded. And fundraising is a near-full time job; you won’t have much time for actually driving your taxi. *6. You will have a new boss* You know the great thing about working for yourself? Well, if you raise VC, you probably don’t have that thing any more. Raising VC usually means forming a board that includes your investors, and that board is charged with, among other things, potentially firing and replacing you. I’ve worked with a number of boards and have been lucky in that they were all awesome and I would recommend those folks to anybody. But if you like your freedom, then bringing on VC may feel somewhat familiar – in an “I have a boss again” way you probably won’t enjoy. *What are my alternatives?* VC is really only appropriate for a tiny fraction of a fraction of the companies in the US. But there are numerous alternatives. - *Angel investors* are individual investors who can invest larger amounts, on more flexible terms, and with less onerous restrictions. Many companies that take VC money actually start with angel investments – but lots of companies never do VC, and just grow off of angel investment. - *Traditional bank loans* are always an option if you have a sufficiently traditional company – while they may not be right for many purposes, they’re definitely the best terms you will find for bringing in capital. - A *Revenue Loan* from a company like Lighter Capital<http://www.lightercapital.com/>is a way for companies with revenue to bring in capital with a debt structure – without giving up control to outside investors. - And, of course, *Bootstrapping* is arguably the best way of all – re-investing your company’s profits in your own growth, and building a strong company based on the revenues from your business. *…So does this mean I shouldn’t raise VC?* Look. I’ve raised over $30mm from 7 different firms in the course of my two startups. I will tell you: if you are the right kind of company, and find the right kind of investor, then VC is *awesome*. It’s an instant infusion of cash, connections, experience, credibility, and confidence at the stroke of a pen. It accelerates everything. It focuses the mind. I can’t recommend it highly enough. But most companies are not the right kind of companies. And the only thing more frustrating and time consuming than raising a VC round is failing to raise a VC round. So think hard. Make sure it’s for you. And if not – keep on driving! *(Update: Mike Carter <https://twitter.com/#%21/MikeFROMRevere> from Revere Taxi <http://reveretaxi.com/> has pointed out that if I’m going to use his email to write my blog post, the least I can do is give him a backlink.)"* *Dan Shapiro currently works at Google following their acquisition of his most recent company, Sparkbuy, a comparison shopping website that offered unprecedented depth and accuracy of information. Before that, he was founder and CEO of Ontela, a pioneering mobile imaging company that merged with Photobucket, where he was named CEO of the Year by MobileBeat. **He blogs at *DanShapiro.com <http://danshapiro.com/>*, and you can also follow him on Twitter at @DanShapiro <http://twitter.com/@DanShapiro>.*

1 0

FW: PRESS RELEASE ON FIXING OF PRICES
by Wambua, Christopher 24 Apr '12

24 Apr '12

PRESS RELEASE 23rd April 2012 Listers CCK's response to media reports on alleged collusion to fix retail mobile voice prices The attention of the Communications Commission of Kenya (CCK) has been drawn to media reports alleging a plan to fix retail voice tariffs by a section of the mobile service providers ostensibly with tacit approval of CCK. The CCK wishes to state as follows: 1. CCK considers the retail mobile voice market as sufficiently competitive, thus making it unnecessary to impose any stringent retail price regulatory obligations on the licensed mobile operators. However, even for such competitive market segments where the Commission does not impose retail price setting obligations, the law (i.e. clause 4(3) of the Kenya Information and Communications (Tariff) Regulations, 2010,) prohibits licensees from applying tariffs that distort competition, exploit consumers and, possibly even prevent market entry. 2. Therefore, all mobile operators set their retail prices independently guided primarily by their costs of providing a particular service and are only obligated to file with the Commission their retail rates as provided for in their respective licences. 3. While the CCK recently held discussions with some licensees regarding the wholesale interconnection rate and the attendant glide path, no request has been officially made regarding the intention to fix the retail mobile voice tariff either by those players on any other licensee. As such, no such approval has been granted. 4. Retail price fixing as practiced in collusive oligopoly markets is an anti-competitive business practice that is contrary to the prevailing competition law and policy. Retail price fixing in the mobile voice market in Kenya would, therefore, be in breach of the law; and as such no approval can be granted. 5. The Commission is currently carrying out a study to evaluate the impact of competition on the mobile voice market on the entire economy. We would like to clarify that the study, which is being undertaken by the Kenya Institute of Public Policy Research and Analysis (KIPPRA), is in not in any way meant to determine interconnection rates for the mobile telecoms market. Issued by Francis W. Wangusi Ag. Director-General

1 0

Counting the blessings, 10 years of Kibaki government
by Kivuva 24 Apr '12

24 Apr '12

We have always been a country of complaining and criticizing. I applied for a passport renewal on 2nd April 2012 and collected the new passport on 19th April. That was within 11 working days. The automation and workflow seems to be working smooth;y. These are the positives that we did not have 10 years ago. Probably listers can also count their blessing for the last 10 years. Regards 10rdmwesh -- ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva For Business Development Transworld Computer Channels twitter.com/lordmwesh www.transworldAfrica.com | Fluent in computing kenya.or.ke | The Kenya we know

1 0

Professional Certification and Standardization a Must, is this feasible?
by Barrack Otieno 23 Apr '12

23 Apr '12

Listers, I am just going through an article by Harry Hare in the CIO magazine Vol 4 March 2012. He mentions efforts by the Computer Society of Kenya and the IT standards association to institutionalise some form of standards, it appears there is no organisation to spearhead this initiative. I am involved in Standards developement at Kenya Bureu of Standards (ISO 27000 series) together with a number of colleagues on the list and must admit it has been frustrating to get this message out there to the industry, how practical is it to use the Directorate of industrial training to enforce this? Best Regards -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/

3 4

Konza: Similar route to all kenyan urban centres?
by Andrew Gesora 23 Apr '12

23 Apr '12

This article should make an interetsting read, especially to the physical planners http://goo.gl/RRvod <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> --------------------

1 1

Fw: [afnog] African Internet Standards Forum - May 12th 2012, 9AM GMT
by Walubengo J 20 Apr '12

20 Apr '12

Here's one more Kenyan bringing "goodies" to the African Techincal landscape. Apply. walu. --- On Wed, 4/18/12, Kevin G. Chege <chege(a)isoc.org> wrote: From: Kevin G. Chege <chege(a)isoc.org> Subject: [afnog] African Internet Standards Forum - May 12th 2012, 9AM GMT To: afnog(a)afnog.org Date: Wednesday, April 18, 2012, 1:37 PM Dear all, The Internet Society Africa Regional Bureau is organizing the first ever Africa wide Internet Standards Forum that will take place in Serekunda, Gambia on May 12th 2012 from 9.00am GMT to 1.00pm GMT. The forum will also be streamed live on the online conferencing tool Webex. The forum will discuss Internet standards and the role the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) plays in setting open Internet standards. African participation in IETF activities has been limited and this forum is an effort to encourage African participation in the IETF, especially for graduating class, Masters and Ph.D. level University students and instructors in order for Africa to play a role in the development of the Internet.University students, lecturers, researchers and Internet enthusiasts from Africa interested in learning about open Internet Standards are encouraged to attend. To attend, you can register online and participate remotely or attend the session at a participating local hub in your country. Details of the participating hubs (hosted by ISOC African chapters) will be made available by the 6th of May 2012. For those who will be in Gambia already attending AfNOG, details of the meeting room will be made available before the day of the forum. For more details, please visit http://internetsociety.org/events/african-internet-standards-forum To learn more about the IETF, watch this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqc8vd_jPpg Regards Kevin G. ChegeISOC -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ afnog mailing list http://afnog.org/mailman/listinfo/afnog

1 0

Re: [kictanet] Fw: [AfriNIC-rpd] Call for Public Comments on AfriNIC Board Candidates
by Walubengo J 20 Apr '12

20 Apr '12

@10rdmwesh - being a Prof. is not easy ;-) Anyhow, your question maybe be better handled by the next Board, however I can give some personal analysis from experience. 1. Despite AfriNIC training thousands of Internet Engineers in IPv6, you will agree that adoption/uptake of IPv6 has been comparatively poor. So expect to see more emphasise on IPv6 Training for "Non-Techies" i.e. Business & Government Leaders in an attempt to present the case for IPv6 in non-technical jargon in order to reach decision makers outside the hard-core tech-field. 2. As IPv4 (the original Internet Protocol "Platform") numbers get depleted in other regions (e.g. Asia, Europe) expect the black-market for IPv4 trading which does exist in developed economies to start focusing on the large perhaps "idle" African IP resources. So the next Board has to deal with this reality sooner rather than later. 3. Cyber Security: As the African region gets more and more online, the Cyber Incidences and issues will become more prominent and more people (Governments) especially will begin to justifiably wonder how and if the critical building block of the the Internet - the IP number - can be used to enhance Security. So expect to see a more pronounced outreach to Governments as an effort to better understand how both stakeholders can work together rather against each other to enhance Cyber-security. 4. Also expect to have some Agencies exploiting Point 2 and 3 above as reason enough to have IP resources allocated to Governments rather than AfriNIC in order to hold the same in trust. I may not agree with this but it will be something to deal with going forward. walu. --- On Fri, 4/20/12, Kivuva <Kivuva(a)transworldafrica.com> wrote: From: Kivuva <Kivuva(a)transworldafrica.com> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Fw: [AfriNIC-rpd] Call for Public Comments on AfriNIC Board Candidates To: jwalu(a)yahoo.com Cc: "I-Network Uganda" <i-network(a)dgroups.org>, "eThinkTankTZ eThinkTankTZ" <ethinktanktz(a)yahoogroups.com>, "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Friday, April 20, 2012, 12:35 PM Mr. Walubengo (soon to be Prof), as we endorse your second term candidature at https://meeting.afrinic.net/afrinic-16/?q=content/board-elections-candidates, and with the good work the board did for the last 3 years including bringing Afrinic14 home at Daressalaam, and holding a KENIC/IPV6 training workshop in conjunction with Tespok at Sarova Stanley hotel Nairobi. What should we expect as a region for the next 3 years? 10rdmwesh -- ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva For Business Development Transworld Computer Channels twitter.com/lordmwesh transworldAfrica.com | Fluent in computing kenya.or.ke | The Kenya we know _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jwalu%40yahoo.com The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

1 0