- KICTANet - KICTANet

Fwd: CIPESA Commentary writing competition: publication plus $100 cash prize
by Brian Longwe 29 Sep '05

29 Sep '05

Begin forwarded message: > > > Commentary Writing Competition > A competition to support writers and encourage reflection on > international > ICT policies that affect East and Southern Africa > > COLLABORATION ON INTERNATIONAL ICT POLICY FOR EAST & SOUTHERN > AFRICA (CIPESA) > -------------------------------------------- > > CIPESA commentaries are short informative articles or essays on > current > issues affecting East and Southern African stakeholders. They focus > specifically on international policy-making processes related to > information and communications technology (ICT), and the use of ICT > for > poverty reduction. Commentaries present basic facts, explain points of > tension, and highlight areas of concern, and they stir discussion by > presenting strong views and raising provocative questions. The > objective is > to spark thinking and dialog around the topic, rather than just to > present > expert opinions in an authoritative way. Commentaries are > disseminated via > the CIPESA website and our Stakeholders email list, and > readers are encouraged to respond to the points raised by submitting > comments that are also published. > > COMMENTARY WRITING COMPETITION > We are holding this writing competition to spur writers from the > East and > Southern African region to share their perspectives on the issues and > initiate discussion and debate. > > => Eligible participants must be from countries that fall within the > CIPESA mandate (see list below). > => Participants are invited to submit 2-3 page articles on one of the > themes listed below. > => Our panel of judges will select 5 winners. > => The winning articles will be edited by a CIPESA staff member > who will > work with each author to fine-tune the piece, and the final > commentary will > be published on the CIPESA website and newslist by the end of the > year. > => In addition to publication, the 5 winners will receive a $100 > cash prize. > > Deadline for submissions is 15 October 2005. > Winners will be announced 30 October 2005. > > PARAMETERS FOR SUBMISSIONS > Themes to choose from: > * Interconnection costs for telecommunications and Internet > * Intellectual property rights > * Harmonization of e-government strategies in view of regional blocks > (such as the East African Community or Southern Africa Development > Cooperation) > * Trade agreements and ICT in the context of the World Trade > Organization > > CIPESA countries include: Angola, Botswana, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, > Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Rwanda, > Seychelles, Somalia, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, > Zambia, > Zimbabwe > > The following tips can greatly increase your article's chances of > winning: > * Use a catchy title that frames the main point or question of > your article > * Make the first paragraph a good summary of the rest of the article > * Explain the background to the issues before launching into > opinions on > them > * Include appropriate references to the work or opinions of others > that > have informed your views > * Describe points of controversy or disagreement > * Raise unresolved questions > * Try not to write in the first-person voice using "I" or "we" > > The criteria we will use for judging winners: > * Issue has a direct impact on East and Southern Africa stakeholders > * Issue is relevant to the field of information and communications > technology policy > * Issue is timely and falls within the context of the designated > themes > * Article has an international dimension > * Argument is presented well with flow from one point to the next > * Grammar and writing style is appropriate to a commentary format > > To submit commentaries or for more information contact: > Vincent Waiswa Bagiire > Email: vincent(a)cipesa.org > > The Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East & Southern > Africa > (CIPESA) is an initiative to help Africans to better understand the > policy-making processes that affect them, especially in the area of > ICT and > development. Our objectives are to raise awareness about key issues, > provide useful information to assist African participation in > policy-making, and stir debate by sparking discussion and convening > productive gatherings. Decision-making related to the use of ICT for > poverty reduction is a primary area of interest. > > CIPESA was established under the Catalysing Access to ICTs in Africa > (CATIA) initiative, funded by the UK Department for International > Development. CIPESA is a program of bridges.org. > > For more information see www.cipesa.org. > > -------------------------------------------- > Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East & Southern > Africa (CIPESA) > Plot 30, Bukoto Street, Kamwokya, P.O. Box 26970 Kampala - Uganda > Tel: +256 31 280073, +256 41 533057, +256 41 533054, Website: > www.cipesa.org > >

1 0

from WIPO general assembly proceedings..
by Emmanuel Njenga 29 Sep '05

29 Sep '05

Hello all, Just reporting back of a detour from the WSIS process where I went to the WIPO Meeting General Assembly: today (29/09/2005 3.30 - 4.30 pm) The main focus of the meeting is around the ICG ( intergovernmental committee) on Intellectual property, Genetic Resources, Traditional-Indigenous knowledge and folklore. The relevant document under discussion was WO/GA/32/7 - and can be found on the WIPO website. Among some of the items discussed is the extension of the intergovernmental committee (IGC) tenure to continue its work for two more years in keeping with its present mandate. Most governments seem to support this statement. There is also the issues of establishment of a voluntary fund to support participation of indigenous communities to attend relevant decision making forum. Many governments delegates presented statements with regard to these issues.. I just noted some of items from the statement presented by Kenya. ---- That a consultation process/committee was set up under the office of the Attorney General regarding the development of policies on intellectual property, genetic resources, traditional -indigenous knowledge, culture e.t.c...The outcomes of this process will be expected to present its results at the end of the year. The consultation process/committee is comprised of a multi stakeholder process with govt, private sector and NGOs - civil society. ---- It would be good for all interested to follow up regarding this process, interact with those involved and especially find out which civil society organizations/NGOs and thus participate in the process to make contributions on the policy development. Regards, Njenga

1 0

New Strategies for MSP in Kenya
by Wainaina Mungai 29 Sep '05

29 Sep '05

Heres a clarification from someone else in the fraternity. It may guide our discussion on what is the real issue. QUOTE: Kenya is coming from situation where communication services have been provided by a monopoly - consequently most of the MSP including the civil society were involved with lobbying the Government to liberalize the telecommunication sector. Here is the transition: Liberalization has now happened! The next phase is to ensure the protection of consumers in a competitive environment. I therefore feel that MSP need to change strategies. Firstly there are no active communication consumer lobby groups in Kenya...this I believe could constitute the new role for civil society! Secondly, MSP should be lobbying relevant organisation to reduce communication costs, this would include telecommunication operators, service providers and government agencies. END QUOTE -- Technical and Product Development Manager Oneworld International 4th Floor, Kimathi House Nairobi. Kenya. Tel: +254-20-316800 Fax: +254-20-241920 ----- Free SMSNews4theDEAF: SMS the text DEAF ON to the number 560 and you will receive FREE SMS News on issues relevant to people who are deaf or have Hearing Impairment. To stop the messages, send DEAF OFF to the number 560.

1 0

[Fwd: <incom> MULTI-STAKEHOLDER PARTNERSHIPS – LESSONS FROM THE KENYA ICT FRATERNITY!!]
by Dorcas Muthoni 29 Sep '05

29 Sep '05

I think we should sit together first and iron out our local issues before broadcasting them to the world. I am sorry but i feel disapponted when we fail to see that any positive change will come from our own efforts, not by fighting each other, but listening to our different opinions. Regards, Muthoni

1 0

RE: List Merger/amalgamation
by Wainaina Mungai 29 Sep '05

29 Sep '05

My question to Mucheru & Florence is why should KIPlist continue to exist in any form (kiplist.or.ke or other) if as was initially suggested, it could be absorbed into KICTANet as the KIP project has come to an end in 3 weeks? Wouldn't that progress the duplication? Or is it that KICTANet should be absorbed into KIPList and not the other way round? Forgive my ignorance but I thought we were all working to build KICTANet and I fail to see why we cannot just move KIP into KICTANet and move on. Wainaina

1 0

Using Yahoo mail within your usual eMail client?
by Alex Gakuru 29 Sep '05

29 Sep '05

Hi, Ever needed to use you yahoo mail in your usual client seamlessly? · YPOPs! and IncrediMail Xe (40650 Reads) · YPOPs! and Calypso 3.x (6085 Reads) · YPOPs! and Outlook 2003 (42794 Reads) · YPOPs! and Mozilla Mail (60975 Reads) · YPOPs! and nPOP (10073 Reads) · YPOPs! and Outlook Express (217579 Reads) · YPOPs! and Outlook XP (140911 Reads) · YPOPs! and Forte Agent News/Mail Reader v1.93 (2802 Reads) · YPOPs! and Outlook 2000 (76728 Reads) · YPOPs! and Pegasus Mail 3.12c (7124 Reads) · YPOPs! and Eudora 5.x (19735 Reads) · YPOPs! and Lotus Notes R6 (6355 Reads) · YPOPs! and Netscape Mail 4.x (12888 Reads) · YPOPs! and Outlook Express 6 (78646 Reads) · YPOPs! and Opera M2 (8945 Reads) · YPOPs! and Mozilla Thunderbird (27880 Reads) OS Versions: Linux (4) Linux versions of YahooPOPs! These are currently delivered in source form. Mac OS (2) YahooPOPs! for Mac OS. Source Code (2) Source code downloads Sun Solaris (1) Sun Solaris version of YahooPOPs! Windows (2) Win32 versions of YahooPOPs! These versions will work on Windows 9x, Me, NT 4.0, 2000 and XP. An opensource program with very small memory footprint is available here http://yahoopops.sourceforge.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=… Regards, Alex

1 0

Re: List Merger/amalgamation
by Joseph Mucheru 28 Sep '05

28 Sep '05

Dear Florence, Many thanks for taking the time to provide the information as you did. If you remember as TESPOK, we registered the domain name kiplist.or.ke and that is still available for any eventuality. We certainly do not lay claims to that and as you are also aware we also registered and provided the KICTAnet.or.ke list services for FREE to the everyone. I would just like to add that even though Bill has this view that we in private sector were out to get donor funds, this is purely an isolated view and that most people that have interacted with TESPOK know that we have played a partner support role rather than as implied. National ICT issues are not necessarily for only civil society. I therefore strongly feel we need a list where all stakeholders can discuss issues of national interest. As is already stated, each group should have it's own list but we must have a central common list to discuss common issues. be they price or quality of service. The fact that am in private sector (in the Internet business) does not mean I do not have a view on say GSM or other services. I would therefore like to propose an even wilder view - let us get use one list that is Kenyan based kiplist.or.ke and get that hosted by KENIC who are the closest thing to a truly multi-stakeholder body. The list should also be moderated by KENIC - Sorry Victor/Michuki for not consulting you first. This way KICTANet can continue with it's advocacy activities. My two cents worth. -- Joseph Mucheru Chairman Telecommunications Service Providers Association of Kenya (TESPOK) 14th Floor, Bruce House - Standard Street P O Box 27589 -00506 Nairobi, KENYA Tel: +254-20-245036 Cell: +254-722522135 Http://www.tespok.co.ke On 27 Sep 2005, at 19:23, Bill Kagai wrote: > Dear Florence, > > I also salute you for taking time to respond to the queries > raised...(mostly mine). > The bottom line unfortunately remains that Civil Society was > short-changed by 3 factors; > 1. Inactive CS leaders who we feel have to go and a new crop to > take over. > 2. Some stakeholders mostly private sector organisations masquerading > as civil society domineering and sucking CS organisations out of the > process. > 3. Lack of support (mostly donor funds) which went to the > organisations mentioned in (2) and thus rendering real Civil Society > inactive. > > All the same I'm happy it is all out in the open and hope > recommendations suggested on improving the Civil Society sector will > be taken seriously in the projects currently being developed. We look > forward to Wainaina leading Civil Society into true engagement in the > multistakeholder activities. > > Guess mine was to 'inspire then expire'. > > -- > With Kind Regards, > Bildad Kagai > CEO - Circuits & Packets Communications Ltd > Coordinator - Free Software & Open Source Foundation for Africa > (FOSSFA) > Suite B2, Tetu Apartments, State House Avenue > P. O. Box 20311 - 00200 > Nairobi, Kenya > Tel. 254 20 2728332 > Fax. 254 20 2726965 > Cell. 254 722 379409 > E. fossfa(a)gmail.com > URL. www.fossfa.net > > --- > Submitted by: Bildad Kagia <billkagai(a)gmail.com> 2005-09-27 > 12:27:59 EDT4 > (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) > --- > You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [mucheru(a)wananchi.com] > To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-kiplist- > cl-99183W(a)lyris.idrc.ca > > !DSPAM:43397228375961234514069! > >

1 0

$100 Laptop moves closer to reality
by Brian Longwe 28 Sep '05

28 Sep '05

The $100 laptop moves closer to reality Published: September 28, 2005, 8:55 AM PDT By Mike Ricciuti Staff Writer, CNET News.com CAMBRIDGE, Mass.--A low-cost computer for the masses moved one step closer to reality on Wednesday. Nicholas Negroponte, the co-founder of the Media Lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, detailed specifications for a $100 windup-powered laptop targeted at children in developing nations. Negroponte, who laid out his original proposal at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in January, said MIT and his nonprofit group, called One Laptop Per Child, is in discussions with five countries--Brazil, China, Thailand, Egypt and South Africa--to distribute up to 15 million test systems to children. In addition, Massachusetts is working with MIT on a plan to distribute the laptops to schoolchildren, Negroponte said. "This is the most important thing I have ever done in my life," Negroponte said on Wednesday during a presentation at Technology Review's Emerging Technologies Conference at MIT. "Reception has been incredible. The idea is simple. It's an education project, not a laptop project. If we can make education better--particularly primary and secondary schools--it will be a better world." He said a goal of the project is to make the low-cost PC idea a grassroots movement that will spread in popularity, like the Linux operating system or the Wikipedia free online encyclopedia. "This is open-source education. It's a big issue." Negroponte said the idea is that governments will pay roughly $100 for the laptops and will distribute them for free to students. The proposed design of the machines calls for a 500MHz processor, 1GB of memory and an innovative dual-mode display that can be used in full-color mode, or in a black-and-white sunlight-readable mode. The display makes the laptop "both an electronic book and a laptop," he said. One display design being considered is a flat, flexible printed display developed at MIT's Media Lab. Negroponte said the technology can be used to produce displays that cost roughly 10 cents per square inch. "The target is $12 for a 12-inch display with near-zero power consumption," he said. Power for the new systems will be provided through either conventional electric current, batteries or by a windup crank attached to the side of the notebooks, since many countries targeted by the plan do not have power in remote areas, Negroponte said. The machines, which will run a version of the Linux operating system, will also include other applications, some developed by MIT researchers, as well as country-specific software. "Software has gotten too fat and unreliable, so we started with Linux," he said. For connectivity, the systems will be Wi-Fi- and cell phone-enabled, and will include four USB ports, along with built-in "mesh networking," a peer-to-peer concept that allows machines to share a single Internet connection. "In emerging nations, the issue is not connectivity," Negroponte said. "That was the issue, but there are many people working on it, (thanks to) global competitiveness. But for education, the roadblock is the laptop." Five companies are working with MIT to develop an initial 5 million to 15 million test units within the year: Google, Advanced Micro Devices, News Corp., Red Hat and BrightStar, Negroponte said. He said the current plan is to produce 100 million to 150 million units by 2007. Negroponte admits that his goals are ambitious. Currently, the world production of laptops is just under 50 million, he said. While the initial goal of the project is to work with governments, Negroponte said MIT is considering licensing the design or giving it to a third-party company to build commercial versions of the PC. "Those might be available for $200, and $20 or $30 will come back to us to make the kids' laptops. We're still working on that," he said. Others have launched low-cost PC ideas in the past, though MIT's project may be the most ambitious. Last year, Advanced Micro Devices announced plans for its Personal Internet Connector--a prototype with a price tag of at least $185, with no display. And an Indian company called Novatium said it plans to offer a stripped-down home computer for about $70 or $75. In addition, Microsoft's antipiracy-minded Steve Ballmer last year called for a move toward the $100 PC for developing nations.

1 0

What is civil society?
by Wainaina Mungai 28 Sep '05

28 Sep '05

1. Definition on BBC 'A civil society is a public space between the state, the market and the ordinary household, in which people can debate and tackle action'. http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/people/highlights/010705_civil.shtml 2. Definition by Centre for Civil Society Civil society refers to the arena of uncoerced collective action around shared interests, purposes and values. In theory, its institutional forms are distinct from those of the state, family and market, though in practice, the boundaries between state, civil society, family and market are often complex, blurred and negotiated. Civil society commonly embraces a diversity of spaces, actors and institutional forms, varying in their degree of formality, autonomy and power. Civil societies are often populated by organisations such as registered charities, development non-governmental organisations, community groups, women's organisations, faith-based organisations, professional associations, trades unions, self-help groups, social movements, business associations, coalitions and advocacy group. (LSE Centre for Civil Society - http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/CCS/what_is_civil_society.htm ) 3. Definition from DfID http://www.dfid.gov.uk/aboutdfid/intheuk/workwithcs/cs-how-to-work-what. asp

2 2

FW: [governance] ALERT: new "terrorist" paragraph 50bis introduced
by Wainaina Mungai 28 Sep '05

28 Sep '05

FYI: Here's part of what is going on in Geneva....terrorism seems to have found it's way into the discussions and might find it's way into the final documents. WM -----Original Message----- From: governance-bounces(a)lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance-bounces@lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Ralf Bendrath Sent: 28 September 2005 18:40 To: wsis-cs-plenary; WSIS Internet Governance Caucus Subject: [governance] ALERT: new "terrorist" paragraph 50bis introduced Hi all, a disturbing development occured this afternoon: In the working group chaired by Canada from 13:30-15:00, Isreael at the very end introduced a new paragraph proposal (50bis). Other delegations said they have to consult before discussing it, and they will discuss it this evening, I think. The paragraph reads: "New 50bis. We underline the importance of countering the manifestations of terrorism at all its forms in the Internet. In particular, we condemn the use of the internet for purposes of financing of terrorist acts, radicalization towards terrorist acts, recruitment for terrorist acts, and glorification of terrorist acts that may incite further terrorist acts." The Privacy & Security Working Group and the Human Rights Caucus will issue a statement this evening. But in the meantime, talk to your delegations and tell them we don't like this at all. As much as we hate terrorism - formulations like "glorification" etc. are way too ambigous and vague and may easily lead to restrictions of freedom of speech. Best, Ralf PS: The drafting group was open to observers for the whole time, but I did not ask for the floor. _______________________________________________ governance mailing list governance(a)lists.cpsr.org https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance

1 0

KICTANet list & KIPlist
by Wainaina Mungai 28 Sep '05

28 Sep '05

Dear All, This is my request that we all take some time and restore an objective structure to the discussions on the future of KIPlist. I believe we have a general agreement that the subscribers from KIPlist be combined with KICTANet subscribers. I suggest we move KIPList subscribers to the KICTANet list and move on to other issues. The reason for this is that KIP project comes to an end in the next three weeks so we may all work within the "action" network from 18th of October. Does this settle the issues? Other valid issues have arisen from the discussion that we could discuss separately after finalizing the migration of KIP members into KICTANet. These issues include: 1. What is the role of the different stakeholders (CS, private sector, govt, donors)? 2. KICTANet is a 'multistakeholder' forum which has the support of civil society organisations but should not necessarily be considered to represent the views of Civil Society. 3. We need to nurture trust between stakeholders so that the suspicion on positioning or fighting for funds does not come to play. 4. We need more NGO/CBO involvement in the ICT process/forums. Thus civil society needs to regroup and become more effective in advocating issues of social justice, grassroot implementation etc. 5. My role (and that of other individuals/organisations) within the civil society caucus will be discussed with members of the civil society and the multisectoral forum will be updated accordingly. Regards, Wainaina -------------------------------- Oneworld International 4th Floor, Kimathi House Nairobi. [SMS4theDEAF] : If you have hearing impairment or are deaf, type the words DEAF ON and send to the number 560 on your Safaricom line. You will then receive free News alerts via SMS. To stop receiving the news, please send DEAF OFF.

1 0

Fwd: Africa Source II Announcement
by Florence Etta 27 Sep '05

27 Sep '05

>FYI > > > >====================================================================== > > > >Africa Source II - Free and Open Source Software for Local Communities > >Kalangala, Uganda - Jan 08-Jan 15, 2006 > > > >Africa Source II will be an eight day hands-on workshop aimed at > >building the technical skills of those working with NGOs on the > >continent. It will take place in one of the most beautiful parts of the > >Kalangala Island on Victoria Lake during the beginning of January 2006. > > > >Africa Source II will bring together more than 100 NGOs and NGO > >technology support professionals working at the local level across the > >region, together with a handful of field leaders from Africa, Europe, > >North America and Asia. Africa Source II will be a free and open source > >software (FOSS) event. It's primary goal will be to increase the > >practical use of FOSS desktop applications and tools amongst the non > >profit sector in Africa. > > > >Specifically, Africa Source II will focus on how Free and Open Source > >Software (FOSS) can be integrated into the mission-critical work of > >NGO's. We will be bringing together nearly 100 NGO Support Professionals > >and NGO Staff from across Africa to learn new skills, exchange tips, and > >share experiences. All participants will have a history of work with > >service and advocacy NGOs, educational organisations, NGO resource > >centres, community centres and health information organisations. > > > >Participants with a range of experience will learn from one another > >about how FOSS can help make their NGO's more efficient, build capacity > >and assure that they are complying with software licensing laws. They > >will be given an opportunity to develop their understanding of FOSS, > >including exploring the challenges and the future potential of FOSS > >adoption. There will be a range of sessions for participants to take > >part in and will include: > > > > * How to help NGO's plan for, migrate to and adopt FOSS applications > > * How to use FOSS applications to handle information, publish > > content using citizen's media tools and engage constituency > > * How FOSS can increase accessibility through localization, > > translation into local language and dialects > > > >During these sessions participants will get an opportunity to learn from > >peers about how FOSS has impacted their work through case studies and > >skill shares. The workshops will be lead by a range of facilitators from > >the respective region with strong experience in deploying free and open > >source solutions and of working in the non-profit sector. They will be > >joined by a handful of others with relevant experiences from developing > >and transition countries, as well as a select number of leaders in from > >specific fields > > > >The camp will focus on learning by doing, rather than by listening. We > >aim for a "workshop vibe" as opposed to a "conference vibe"; we hope > >that elements like the location, shared housing, and the nature of the > >sessions keep the energy level high and the interest in active > >participation over passive learning strong. Like other source events, > >Africa Source II will be intentionally designed to foster community > >building, this creates an atmosphere conducive to learning, but more > >importantly is essential if longer term relationships are to be built. > > > >Building on the previous Africa Source event (Namibia, March 2004), > >which brought together African FOSS developers working in the social > >sector, Africa Source II will work at the next level to bring together > >those working at the complimentary intermediary level. Besides new > >ideas, skills and contacts that participants will gain they will also > >leave the workshop equipped with an event specific version of > >NGO-in-a-box, a collection of Free and Open Source Software that will be > >relevant to their work. > > > >The Association for Progressive Communication APC (regional network), > >Fantsuam Foundation (Nigeria), Schoolnet Africa (regional network), > >Translate.org.za, WOUGNET (Uganda) and The Tactical Technology > >Collective (the Netherlands) will collaborate to organise the content of > >the workshop and to build strong relationships between the participants. > >The project partners are committed to examining the challenges of > >implementing FOSS in the African context, stretching its potential to > >fit the needs on the ground, and building local capacities to realise > >this. Our local partners there are East African Center for Open Source > >(EACOSS), Linux Solutions and WOUGNET. > > > >We are able to organise Africa Source II thanks to generous support from > > IDRC - The International Development Research Centre > >(http://www.idrc.ca/) OSI - Open Society Institute Information Program > >(http://www.soros.org/initiatives/information) and OSISA Open Society > >Initiative for South Africa (http://www.osisa.org/) > > > >Previous source events have taken place in Croatia - September 2003, > >Namibia - March 2004 and India - February 2005. As well as in Middle > >East & Northern Africa future source events will take place in Central > >Asia (http://www.tacticaltech.org/fossroad) and Middle East. Interaction > >and learning between these regional events is facilitated through the > >exchange of project models and individual expertise. > > > >For more information please visit http://www.tacticaltech.org/africasource2 > > > >We are now accepting applications! The deadline for sending in > >applications is October 15th, 2005. Please find the form here > >http://www.tacticaltech.org/africasource2/applications > > > >Participants will be selected by the Advisory Group based on their > >interest and experiences. There will be a small registration fee for the > >event. A limited number of travel and registration fee scholarships will > >be available and may be applied for on application. If you would like to > >receive an application form or have any questions please write to > >africasource2(a)tacticaltech.org > >Adel El Zaim >Senior Program Specialist / Administrateur de programme principal >Connectivity Africa-Acacia > >Centre de recherches pour le développement international (CRDI) / >International Development Research Center (IDRC) >ICT4D >aelzaim(a)idrc.org.eg >Le Caire, Égypte / Cairo, Egypt > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to acacia-admin-cl as: [FEtta(a)idrc.or.ke] >To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-acacia-admin-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca

1 0

RE: List Merger/amalgamation
by Wainaina Mungai 27 Sep '05

27 Sep '05

Thanks Florence, The bit about KIP coming to an end clarifies the issues for me. In that case, I believe it would be best to transfer the KIP members onto the KICTANet list so that we progress from "Policy" network to an "Action" network. The "action" network can then handle policy issues whenever they arise in future. >KIP is coming to an end, 18th October 2005 and at this moment there are no new activities although discussions are ongoing. These discussion >are in the direction of supporting local institutions. Regards, Wainaina -----Original Message----- From: bounce-kiplist-cl-117112(a)lyris.idrc.ca [mailto:bounce-kiplist-cl-117112@lyris.idrc.ca] On Behalf Of Florence Etta Sent: 27 September 2005 16:12 To: KIPlist Cc: Laurent Elder; Lee Kirkham Subject: List Merger/amalgamation Dear all, I have taken some time to respond to this issue in order to allow as many people as possible to put forward their opinions. Now let me try to respond to each of the charges, issues, questions or queries. But before this let me thank all the people who have responded for their suggestions etc. Let me also remind others who may be seeing this for the first time what this is all about. The original issue was a question that I put to the list yesterday regarding whether or not there is merit in merging two discussion lists: KIPlist and KICTAnet list. KIPlist is a tool of the Kenya ICT Policy Project funded by IDRC and implemented by the Ministry of Planning and National Development and the Office of the President. The co-ordination of this project is located within IDRC. The list (KIPList) is intended to keep a wide range of stakeholders (government, private sector, civil society, intonational development) in the policy process informed of the goings on that have a bearing on ICT policy processes. List members are located in Africa, Canada, UK, Sweden, Australia, to mention a few. Alex has described KICTANet well so it is unnecessary to rehash this here. Now to the responses (in blue italics): Please read this with an open mind. My intention is not to disrupt activities nor discredit people but to try and figure out where the problem in ICT & Civil Society in Kenya lies::: Despite the expressed statement of intention above, this contribution appears to discredit IDRC, CATIA and KICTANet. This is unfair, uncalled for and completely unjustified. 1. Just before the Geneva phase of WSIS 2002, ALIN was mandated to act as secretariat of the Civil Society stakeholders. This task was specifically mandated to James Nguo who has has not called a meeting nor addressed this list for the last two years. As is rightly stated IDRC did make a grant to the Kenya WSIS Civil Society Caucus to support their activities and participation in the Geneva phase of the World Summit on the information Society and this grant is now closed. If the Kenya WSIS Civil Society Caucus has not been active since is it the fault of the KIPlist or KICTANet? 2. Initially, IDRC was a partner supporting various stakeholders including Civil Society. It seems that has changed and IDRC is now part of implementation including guiding policy direction. It is no longer clear if IDRC has its own agenda or it supports the various agendas presented to them in their capacity as focal points of the donor consultative group. The latest proposal to merge the lists to me suggests that IDRC is now an interested party with its own agenda and not what has been proposed to them as donors in broad sense. IDRC's modus operandi has not changed. May I remind all that IDRC's mandate is to generate knowledge for development and capacity development through working with local institutions. In 2003/4 IDRC supported the private sector through KIF and civil society through ARCC both project had to do with support for the ICT policy process. Since 2003 the KIP project has worked with the Ministry of Planning and National Development and the Office of the President in support of the Policy process in Kenya. The request to support this project came from the two government institutions. IDRC does not have an agenda different from supporting those of its partners and any hint that this is otherwise is totally unjustified and in bad taste. 2. Initially, IDRC was a partner supporting various stakeholders including Civil Society. It seems that has changed and IDRC is now part of implementation including guiding policy direction. It is no longer clear if IDRC has its own agenda or it supports the various agendas presented to them in their capacity as focal points of the donor consultative group. The latest proposal to merge the lists to me suggests that IDRC is now an interested party with its own agenda and not what has been proposed to them as donors in broad sense. As for the proposal to merge the lists, this idea came from the major finding of the KIP project which shows that globally as in Kenya the Policy process is best served by multi-stakeholder partnerships; listening to each other, understanding each groups' point of view and working in collaboration to ensure the best results for the most in particular for the country. The project has shown that this mode of working is possible here in Kenya as experienced with the draft ICT policy discussions leading up to the Mombasa conference and thereafter. Of course merging the lists needed to be discussed on both lists. Does this show an agenda? One list is global, the other is Kenyan which started with a specific task to collect and collate public views and opinions on the draft ICT policy. This task is now over with the Cabinet paper done. It seems reasonable to ask about any new/possible roles for this list and this is what we did. That the draft policy is now at the stage it is does not complete all work on this score. Those familiar with the policy process would be aware that the implementation planning is just as important and needs to be done. For this the services of a list might still be required. In fact the future of these lists has been discussed both on line on the lists and off line at KICTAnet meetings. As a moderator of the KIPList I have personally been involved in these and a merger of both lists was one of the suggestions. So a motive or interest cannot be imputed to IDRC when all that is being done is facilitation the discussions on the list. 3. KICTANET is a product of DFID through the CATIA project. But the new direction in this project is now to fit all stakeholders in their agenda and do the actual implementation of their project. I would call this domineering and not promoting multi-stakeholder partnerships. KICTAnet is not simply a product of DFID through the CATIA project. It is a multi-stakeholder network,a creation of collaboration between the KIP Project, DFID 's CATIA project and over one dozen other Kenyan institutions including universities, private sector organisations as well as other civil society organisations (Alice will make this clearer when she is available she is at a workshop). The call to join the national action network (was in response to findings from the private sector and civil society ICT projects) was published on KIPlist and if the WSIS Civil society Caucus did not deem it a space to enter it seems unfair to accuse any other civil society organisations that did so as being unrepresentative or not true civil society. My question thus is what happened to our own agenda (Civil Society) of which we had proposed and submitted to IDRC in form of a request for financial support?? Could it be that there has been an over-ride by the 'donor' projects?? The proposal and action plan had been developed by Abantu, ALIN, ITDG, FEMNET, ACWICT, SIDAREC and other prominent Civil Society organisations of which today feature nowhere in the new 'donor' projects. When was this agenda drawn up? Where was it sent exactly and how? IDRC is a global institution so some clarity is required here. I do not speak for IDRC but this accusation cannot be sustained if these basic parameters are not accurately and reliably established. IDRC works in clearly defined modes.It responds to materials presented in a particular way like most other similar agencies. So proof must be given for this accusation to hold up. We need to go back to the basics and let Civil Society control its own voice where people can raise their own thoughts...private sector theirs and so on. Otherwise, we are even confused who are the Civil Society leaders in Kenya at this point in time. "Civil Society control its own voice" Absolutely!!! That is why it is on the lists. But civil society cannot act in isolation anymore than government or the private sector can. All the contemporary discourse on development shows this and any one who believes otherwise is being anachronistic. Each of the distinct groups should indeed have their agendas and do but they need to speak with other blocs. As regards Kiplist, when it was started I had the understanding it was more a forum for the development partners. It appears somewhere along the way it expanded its scope in a rather tacit way, so to speak. I normally send mail to that list because I have an impression that it has a large audience interested in wide-raging ICT matters but it could always be useful to be reminded in case there are some guidelines. KIPList was not only for development partners although they are included on it. 1. Why would the Kenya ICT Policy Project want to merge with Kenya ICT Action Network? I can already see a difference in the objectives (Policy Discussions - versus - Action). This is where my position differs with Waudo's. The projects are not merging. The suggestion is for the lists (KIPList and KICTANet list) only to merge and this is still an open question. I believe that I have responded to the why above. 2. As Walubengo says, it's similarity of objectives that counts. A genuine partnership will be critical. For instance, are we pulling KIP into KICTANet .... KICTANET into KIP or a new list combining the the two? This is a valid technical question as I understand it and I hope I have it right. The two lists are created in two different domains .ca and .ke. The merger would have to decide where the hosting and facilitation go. As the KIP project comes to an end it is useful to consider sustainable options and a local .ke account is a reasonable one. 3. A Multistakeholder forum is definitely good. The separate stakeholder groupings should however strengthen their different forums (e.g TESPOK, CSK, WSISYouth, Academia etc) so that their distinct positions on issues are clearly represented when they come together to negotiate for a truly 'multistakeholder' outcome. This is in line with Bill's & Gilda's point. Agree 4. Has the KIP project come to an end? Am aware of the implementation & restructuring plans within KICTANet and would be happy to comment if I know what KIP prject plans to implement. If the goals and methodology converge, then the two should be one. KIP is coming to an end, 18th October 2005 and at this moment there are no new activities although discussions are ongoing. These discussion are in the direction of supporting local institutions. 5. The duplication of emails is not good but it should not be the reason to merge separate processes. Maybe we need to clarify the two processes so that the lists are not defined by (who) is a member; but by the objective of the list. I hope the objective of the two lists is now clear and a decision can be made one way or the other. Cheers, FE --- Submitted by: Florence Etta 2005-09-27 08:17:31 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [wainaina.mungai(a)oneworld.net] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-kiplist-cl-117112D(a)lyris.idrc.ca

1 0

RE: List Merger/amalgamation
by Wainaina Mungai 27 Sep '05

27 Sep '05

Hi, I believe the feeling by some members is that the KIP project and the KICTANet process need to be clear on whether a merger of email lists means a merger of processes & project plans. - If the merge of e-mail discussion list does not mean a merger of two projects/processes, then the answer is go-ahead. - If it means we merge processes, then let's first find out why KIP & KICTANet should be one (other than avoiding the duplication of emails). KICTANet has an evolving structure and plan of work. What is the KIP project up to? If those two differ, then merger would not be prudent. Is there anyone in a position to clarify the issues above? >From the comments I have read on CS & MSPs, I believe Bill's point is that private sector lobby groups (TESPOK, CSK, KIF et. al.) should not be considered as 'civil society'.and that KICTANet is not 'civil society' but rather, a 'multistakeholder forum' for CS, private sector et. al. to develop common positions and partnerships for action. Regards Wainaina What is civil society meant to bring to the ICT policy and implementation processes in Kenya? (Adapted from APC's (Karen Banks) CS presentation in Tokyo, May 2005) Civil Society provides "a space between the market & the State". Neither private sector nor government can play this role. The role of civil society within KICTANet and other processes shall include: - Accountability: keep political & market forces accountable to the needs of all members of society - Transparency: encourage social responsibility and good governance practice - People versus profit: advocate for development of social projects & activities that are critical but may not be 'fashionable' or profitable - Civil Society values: shaping vision of human-centred information societies based on human rights, sustainable development, social justice & empowerment -----Original Message----- From: bounce-kiplist-cl-117112(a)lyris.idrc.ca [mailto:bounce-kiplist-cl-117112@lyris.idrc.ca] On Behalf Of Brian Longwe Sent: 27 September 2005 10:45 To: KIPlist Cc: lelder(a)idrc.ca; lkirkham(a)idrc.or.ke Subject: Re: List Merger/amalgamation my suggestion is that the lists should be merged Brian On 27 Sep 2005, at 02:56, John Walubengo wrote: > Unbelievably to the point. These examples from Bill can never be > any better...I now know what Civil Society should really be about... > > My only problem is that I am not sure whether we have resolved the > original issue:- Should we merge, cooperate or patner the two lists? > > Either way, I must confess that I am glad that the issue has > raised more questions than answers... > > walu. > > >>>> Bill Kagai <billkagai(a)gmail.com> 09/26/05 07:26PM >>> >>>> > On 9/26/05, waudo siganga <emailsignet(a)mailcan.com> wrote: > >> Hi Bill, >> >> I agree with you that "organizations representing or improving the >> environment where private sector interests thrive cannot >> [necessarily] >> be justified as Civil Society". However I do not agree with your >> assertion that these organizations "do not care and neither would >> they >> address the social implications of their direct >> actions. " This is a very strong but wrong statement. The majority of >> successful organizations in the private sector run well documented >> social responsibilty programs, unless I have mis-understood you. >> > > Hi Waudo, > > You got me wrong!! Let me use two or three examples to illustrate my > point on social implications. > > 1. We know that internet exchange points have been established, fibre > has been rolled around the metropolis, direct VSATs licensed...and > realistically...though debatable, internet costs should go down. Has > this happened?? No!! Because we cannot expect organisations fighting > regulatory and licensing affairs to also fight the battle for > consumers. Real Civil Society has to take up the issue of pushing for > consumer protection in a multi-stakeholder environment to force a > price reduction. > > 2. When a mobile telephone company at any one time holds kshs 9.00 > from each subscriber in their 3.1 million subscriber base..at any one > time, that translates to kshs 27,900,000 at any one time. Whilst the > mobile company might have good reasons for that, perhaps Civil Society > can lobby that the interest accruing from that account is used to > champion ICT or any other humanitarian rights equivalent to that > amount. Telecommunication organisations might champion other interests > but certainly not those that are in direct conflict with those of > their members. > > These are just but two fallacies (by example) that only true Civil > Society can champion...if the proper support goes to the right > organisations. But again, they are hypothetical. > > [No persons are meant to be hurt in these examples and all characters > are fictitious. Any resemblance to an entity that fits the description > is purely by coincidence and any insinuation is highly regretted.] > > --- > Submitted by: Bildad Kagia <billkagai(a)gmail.com> 2005-09-26 > 12:31:37 EDT4 > (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) > --- > You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke] > To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-kiplist- > cl-102682Q(a)lyris.idrc.ca > > > --- > Submitted by: John Walubengo <jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke> 2005-09-27 > 01:50:56 EDT4 > (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) > --- > You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [brian(a)pure-id.com] > To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-kiplist- > cl-91321D(a)lyris.idrc.ca > -- Brian Longwe Tel: +254 20 316171 Chief Executive Officer Cell:+254 722 518744 InHand Limited Fax: +254 20 350157 Sharp Centre, Wambui Rd PO Box 43042-00100 Muthaiga, Nairobi http://www.inhand.co.ke KENYA Putting the world in your hand --- Submitted by: brian(a)inhand.co.ke 2005-09-27 02:46:48 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [wainaina.mungai(a)oneworld.net] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-kiplist-cl-117112D(a)lyris.idrc.ca

1 0

Re: List Merger/amalgamation
by John Walubengo 27 Sep '05

27 Sep '05

Unbelievably to the point. These examples from Bill can never be any better...I now know what Civil Society should really be about... My only problem is that I am not sure whether we have resolved the original issue:- Should we merge, cooperate or patner the two lists? Either way, I must confess that I am glad that the issue has raised more questions than answers... walu. >>> Bill Kagai <billkagai(a)gmail.com> 09/26/05 07:26PM >>> On 9/26/05, waudo siganga <emailsignet(a)mailcan.com> wrote: > Hi Bill, > > I agree with you that "organizations representing or improving the > environment where private sector interests thrive cannot [necessarily] > be justified as Civil Society". However I do not agree with your > assertion that these organizations "do not care and neither would they > address the social implications of their direct > actions. " This is a very strong but wrong statement. The majority of > successful organizations in the private sector run well documented > social responsibilty programs, unless I have mis-understood you. Hi Waudo, You got me wrong!! Let me use two or three examples to illustrate my point on social implications. 1. We know that internet exchange points have been established, fibre has been rolled around the metropolis, direct VSATs licensed...and realistically...though debatable, internet costs should go down. Has this happened?? No!! Because we cannot expect organisations fighting regulatory and licensing affairs to also fight the battle for consumers. Real Civil Society has to take up the issue of pushing for consumer protection in a multi-stakeholder environment to force a price reduction. 2. When a mobile telephone company at any one time holds kshs 9.00 from each subscriber in their 3.1 million subscriber base..at any one time, that translates to kshs 27,900,000 at any one time. Whilst the mobile company might have good reasons for that, perhaps Civil Society can lobby that the interest accruing from that account is used to champion ICT or any other humanitarian rights equivalent to that amount. Telecommunication organisations might champion other interests but certainly not those that are in direct conflict with those of their members. These are just but two fallacies (by example) that only true Civil Society can champion...if the proper support goes to the right organisations. But again, they are hypothetical. [No persons are meant to be hurt in these examples and all characters are fictitious. Any resemblance to an entity that fits the description is purely by coincidence and any insinuation is highly regretted.] --- Submitted by: Bildad Kagia <billkagai(a)gmail.com> 2005-09-26 12:31:37 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-kiplist-cl-102682Q(a)lyris.idrc.ca

1 0

List Merger/amalgamation
by Florence Etta 26 Sep '05

26 Sep '05

Hi all, At a a brief meeting on Friday Alice and I agreed that it would be a good idea to merge the two list, KICTANet and KIPList. This email is basically to ask if you think this to be a good idea or not and why. Cheers, FE Florence Etta Co-Ordinator, Kenya ICT Policy Project International Development Research Centre Liaison House, State House Avenue P.O. Box 62084, 00200, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254-20-2713160-1: Cell +254-733-621851 Fax: +254-20-2711063 E-mail: fetta(a)idrc.or.ke Web:http// www.idrc.ca/acacia

2 1

Fw: [DigAfrica] How broke company won tender
by alice＠apc.org 25 Sep '05

25 Sep '05

----- Original Message ----- From: <alice(a)apc.org> To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 3:51 PM Subject: Fw: [DigAfrica] How broke company won tender > This is scandalous! more so as consumers continue to suffer the > consequences of a > duopoly.... > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > How broke company won tender > > By Gordon Opiyo > > Details of how companies that were in the red won the country's > third mobile license have been exposed. > > Initial investigations by the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission into > the award of the license in 2003 show that two of the major > shareholders in consortium were had financial difficulties at the > time of the award. > > The investigations could expose what could be one of the > country's > biggest public tendering scandals. > > At the same time, court documents from the South African High Court > have shed more light into intricacies that led to the controversial > award. > > Audited accounts of Econet Wireless International made available > to `The Sunday Standard' show that the company's > financial state was > so bad in 2003 that they could not qualify for an overdraft from any > international bank. > > Sources at the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission say investigators > were startled at the state of accounts of the two main shareholders. > > The winning consortium consisted of Kenya National Federation of Co- > operatives 81 per cent, Econet Wireless International 10 per cent, > Rapsel and Corporate Africa each with 4.5 per cent. > > The Communications Commission of Kenya required members of the > consortium to have a minimum turn over of $100 million (Sh7.5 > billion). > > "Econet's and Kenya National Federation of Co-operatives' > records > could not pass any basic stage even in low capital expenditure > projects," says a senior investigator at the anti- graft body. > > The turn over of Econet Wireless International in that year was $8 > million that of Econet Satellite Services was $9 million, while > Econet Wireless New Zealand, was in deficit. Thus the total turnover > of companies that qualified for the Econet bid was less than $20 > million. > > With the other partners not being financially stable, the consortium > fell short of the minimum financial requirements by well over $80 > million. > > Accounts audited by the London-based Deloitte & Touche LLP paint a > gloomy picture of the state of affairs at Econet Wireless > International. > > In one of the reports, auditors declare that Econet Wireless Limited, > Company Registration No. 4149948, in the year ended June 30, 2003, > urgently needed a cash injection. > > The auditors say: "Each of the Group's (Econet's) Investment > requires > additional financing in the short term in order to develop their > businesses which could then support the carrying values of these > investments in the group's balance sheet. > > The ability of these investment businesses to raise further financing > is not known with any reasonable degree of certainty at this time. " > > The auditors also declare the Econet group could not acquire > overdraft facilities at the time it acquired Kenya's third GSM > license. > > The auditors declare: "The financial statements have been prepared on > the going concern basis, however, the company is in the process of > obtaining further funds to finance ongoing day to day operations and > to finance future capital expenditure." > > The report continues: " In this respect the directors are aware that > they do not have overdraft facilities and there is an immediate and > ongoing need to raise cash to fund day to day operations of the > company and group and to finance the construction of the New Zealand > Telecommunications network." On June 28, Co-operatives Development > minister Njeru Ndwiga shocked the nation when he announced that the > group that had acquired the 81 per cent stake in the third mobile > company was bankrupt. > > Ndwiga announced KNFC was indebted to the tune of Sh40 million > against an asset base of Sh25 million. > > Ndwiga said the cash-strapped organisation was unable to honuor basic > financial obligations such as its Sh1.3 million monthly wage bill, > repayment of a Sh10 million loan from the Cooperative Bank, Sh5.6 > million in statutory deductions and Sh800, 000 in legal fees. > > The minister said that the printing press worth Sh20 million was > vandalised. Ndwiga's revelation came months after The Sunday > Standard > exclusively reported that the company was unable to honour its > obligations in the mobile phone company. > > As a result, the minister banned all officials of KNFC from holding > any position within the co-operative sector. > > The other shareholder, Manga Mugwe of Rapsel Limited had a dispute > with Kenya Commercial Bank over a loan. > > More details of the financial state of Econet Wireless International > came into the public domain in June this year at the South African > High Court. Econet had taken its former finance director, Mwaura > Njiri, to court; accusing him of using confidential information he > got during his tenure to hurt the company. > > In the case number 05/12059 that was heard at the Witwatersrand Local > Division, Mwaura defended himself against the allegations. In a sworn > affidavit explaining how funds for the license fee were raised, > Mwaura says, "The first applicant's (Econet Wireless > International > Limited) balance sheet at that time was so bad that it (Econet) was > unable to obtain funds from any bank. > > The First applicant in fact had been unable to raise the required > amount of $27 million ." > > Mwaura, during whose tenure Econet bid for the license says the > company managed to get funding as a result of his personal > commitment. > > As Econet drags its feet on its roll out plan, the two existing > mobile companies continue making huge profits as the public pays > heavily for their services. > > source : http://www.eastandard.net/hm_news/news.php?articleid=29062 > > > > > Dig Africa site welcomes you to join us at > http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/Digafrica > > Also if you are interested to join a Swahili/English discussion group > click > http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/kiswahili > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > a.. Visit your group "DigAfrica" on the web. > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > DigAfrica-unsubscribe(a)yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >

4 5

The Current Constitution: A download link
by Alex Gakuru 23 Sep '05

23 Sep '05

Hi All, I found the current constitution here http://www.katiba.co.ke/uploads/current_constitution.pdf Alex

1 0

Re: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers
by Florence Etta 23 Sep '05

23 Sep '05

Hi, I believe Alice's is a good idea lets go for this. So when exactly can we have this Meeting in October I personally will be away until 12th. I guess what I am suggesting is for us to continue the planning of this meeting while taking this new angle into consideration etc etc. Cheers, FE At 07:37 PM 9/22/2005 +0300, alice(a)apc.org wrote: >Dear Michael >Thank you for your response. to meet delegation from both the Kenya ICT >policy and Kenya ICT Action Network lists. >We have a public forum planned for October to discuss these issues and your >participation will be most welcome > >kind regards >alice > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Michael Joseph" <MJoseph(a)Safaricom.co.ke> >To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> >Cc: <kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke> >Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 7:21 PM >Subject: Re: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers > > >Whatever I may say or think, you will probably disagree with me, but the >statements contained herein are widely inaccurate, and I am very happy and >willing to meet a delegation of this list to clarify and clear up the >inaccurate statements. I take strong exception to some of what is said as >that is neither our practice as a company nor mine as an individual. > >Regards > >Michael > >-----Original Message----- > From: "John Walubengo" <jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke> > Sent: 22/09/05 12:11:11 > To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> > Cc: "kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke" <kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke> > Subject: Re: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers > > "On 21 Sep 2005, at 22:06, Brian Longwe wrote: > > I'm not taking sides here, just asking questions that I think should > straighten what is clearly spurios reasoning..." > > Unlike Brian, I do wish I could take sides on this one...but this issue >is too complex and > as outsiders, we can only make educated guesses (speculate?). > > Definately, the 3rd Mobile License Saga is not moving forward as >planned. This has created a defacto duopoly that Safaricom and Celtel >continue to exploit with impunity (High Calling rates(airtime) for Kenyans >when rated Internationally, Lack of Number Portability, poorly implemented >EIR (the software that disables stolen phones) system, Unreliable Emergency >Service Lines (equivalent to 999 services), Delayed SMS deliveries, >Retention of Unused Credit, etc, etc, etc. > > A 3rd Mobile Service Provider is likely to destroy un-written, cartel >agreements that the current service providers are conviniently enjoying. >However, the process for inviting the 3rd Operator has been halted in courts >and one wonders (and speculates) on whether the delayed processing of >resolving issue is not deliberate to perpetuate the status quo... > > > walu. > > > > > > >>> <alice(a)apc.org> 09/22/05 11:39am >>> > Brian, I think it was clear that your reference was to the conclusion > arrived at by the author of the article. > But you do bring into light certain aspects that the author left out >which > is helpful in understanding the situation. > However, I think, it would be even more helpful if journalists could go >the > extra mile to explain the mechanisms/structures of the industry being > reported on and allow readers to make the mental exercise of jumping >into > conclusions! > > > thanks > alice > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Longwe" <cto(a)nbi.ispkenya.com> > To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> > Cc: "Kenya ICT Policy - kictanet" <kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke>; "KIPlist" > <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> > Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 9:04 AM > Subject: Re: [Kictanet] Fw: [DigAfrica] How broke company won tender > > > > > > On 21 Sep 2005, at 22:06, Brian Longwe wrote: > > > >> I'm not taking sides here, just asking questions that I think should > >> straighten what is clearly spurios reasoning... > > > > I don't normally reply to my own emails - but I just realised that my > > mention of spurious reasoning yesterday might have been misconstrued > > to be referring to the comments made by my colleagues Alice and > > Florence. I would like to make a correction - I was not referring to > > them but rather to the conclusion reached in the press article by the > > author, which seem to have been based on questionable sources of > > information. > > > > Apologies to all for any misunderstanding :-) > > > > Brian > > > > --- > > Submitted by: cto(a)nbi.ispkenya.com 2005-09-22 02:06:01 EDT4 > > (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [alice(a)apc.org] > > To unsubscribe, forward this message to > > %%email.unsub%% > > > > >--- >Submitted by: alice(a)apc.org 2005-09-22 04:44:57 EDT4 >(Please reply to original submitter for private communication) >--- >You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke] >To unsubscribe, forward this message to %%email.unsub%% > > >--- >Submitted by: John Walubengo <jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke> 2005-09-22 05:13:18 >EDT4 >(Please reply to original submitter for private communication) >--- >You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [MJoseph(a)Safaricom.co.ke] >To unsubscribe, forward this message to %%email.unsub%% > > >--- >Submitted by: MJoseph(a)Safaricom.co.ke 2005-09-22 12:26:44 EDT4 >(Please reply to original submitter for private communication) >--- >You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [alice(a)apc.org] >To unsubscribe, forward this message to >%%email.unsub%% > > >--- >Submitted by: alice(a)apc.org 2005-09-22 12:42:24 EDT4 >(Please reply to original submitter for private communication) >--- >You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [fetta(a)idrc.or.ke] >To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-kiplist-cl-91439A(a)lyris.idrc.ca

1 0

Fw: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers
by alice＠apc.org 23 Sep '05

23 Sep '05

FYI ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Joseph" <MJoseph(a)Safaricom.co.ke> To: <alice(a)apc.org> Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 9:14 AM Subject: Re: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers Thank you, I would like to be there. Please let me know the exact dates when you have them. Regards Michael -----Original Message----- From: alice(a)apc.org Sent: 22/09/05 19:38:44 To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Cc: "kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke" <kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke> Subject: Re: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers Dear Michael Thank you for your response. to meet delegation from both the Kenya ICT policy and Kenya ICT Action Network lists. We have a public forum planned for October to discuss these issues and your participation will be most welcome kind regards alice ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Joseph" <MJoseph(a)Safaricom.co.ke> To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Cc: <kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 7:21 PM Subject: Re: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers Whatever I may say or think, you will probably disagree with me, but the statements contained herein are widely inaccurate, and I am very happy and willing to meet a delegation of this list to clarify and clear up the inaccurate statements. I take strong exception to some of what is said as that is neither our practice as a company nor mine as an individual. Regards Michael -----Original Message----- From: "John Walubengo" <jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke> Sent: 22/09/05 12:11:11 To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Cc: "kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke" <kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke> Subject: Re: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers "On 21 Sep 2005, at 22:06, Brian Longwe wrote: I'm not taking sides here, just asking questions that I think should straighten what is clearly spurios reasoning..." Unlike Brian, I do wish I could take sides on this one...but this issue is too complex and as outsiders, we can only make educated guesses (speculate?). Definately, the 3rd Mobile License Saga is not moving forward as planned. This has created a defacto duopoly that Safaricom and Celtel continue to exploit with impunity (High Calling rates(airtime) for Kenyans when rated Internationally, Lack of Number Portability, poorly implemented EIR (the software that disables stolen phones) system, Unreliable Emergency Service Lines (equivalent to 999 services), Delayed SMS deliveries, Retention of Unused Credit, etc, etc, etc. A 3rd Mobile Service Provider is likely to destroy un-written, cartel agreements that the current service providers are conviniently enjoying. However, the process for inviting the 3rd Operator has been halted in courts and one wonders (and speculates) on whether the delayed processing of resolving issue is not deliberate to perpetuate the status quo... walu. >>> <alice(a)apc.org> 09/22/05 11:39am >>> Brian, I think it was clear that your reference was to the conclusion arrived at by the author of the article. But you do bring into light certain aspects that the author left out which is helpful in understanding the situation. However, I think, it would be even more helpful if journalists could go the extra mile to explain the mechanisms/structures of the industry being reported on and allow readers to make the mental exercise of jumping into conclusions! thanks alice ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Longwe" <cto(a)nbi.ispkenya.com> To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Cc: "Kenya ICT Policy - kictanet" <kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke>; "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 9:04 AM Subject: Re: [Kictanet] Fw: [DigAfrica] How broke company won tender > > On 21 Sep 2005, at 22:06, Brian Longwe wrote: > >> I'm not taking sides here, just asking questions that I think should >> straighten what is clearly spurios reasoning... > > I don't normally reply to my own emails - but I just realised that my > mention of spurious reasoning yesterday might have been misconstrued > to be referring to the comments made by my colleagues Alice and > Florence. I would like to make a correction - I was not referring to > them but rather to the conclusion reached in the press article by the > author, which seem to have been based on questionable sources of > information. > > Apologies to all for any misunderstanding :-) > > Brian > > --- > Submitted by: cto(a)nbi.ispkenya.com 2005-09-22 02:06:01 EDT4 > (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) > --- > You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [alice(a)apc.org] > To unsubscribe, forward this message to > %%email.unsub%% > --- Submitted by: alice(a)apc.org 2005-09-22 04:44:57 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke] To unsubscribe, forward this message to %%email.unsub%% --- Submitted by: John Walubengo <jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke> 2005-09-22 05:13:18 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [MJoseph(a)Safaricom.co.ke] To unsubscribe, forward this message to %%email.unsub%% --- Submitted by: MJoseph(a)Safaricom.co.ke 2005-09-22 12:26:44 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [alice(a)apc.org] To unsubscribe, forward this message to %%email.unsub%% --- Submitted by: alice(a)apc.org 2005-09-22 12:42:24 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [MJoseph(a)Safaricom.co.ke] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-kiplist-cl-90993H(a)lyris.idrc.ca

1 0

Re: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers
by alice＠apc.org 22 Sep '05

22 Sep '05

Dear Michael Thank you for your response. to meet delegation from both the Kenya ICT policy and Kenya ICT Action Network lists. We have a public forum planned for October to discuss these issues and your participation will be most welcome kind regards alice ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Joseph" <MJoseph(a)Safaricom.co.ke> To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Cc: <kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 7:21 PM Subject: Re: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers Whatever I may say or think, you will probably disagree with me, but the statements contained herein are widely inaccurate, and I am very happy and willing to meet a delegation of this list to clarify and clear up the inaccurate statements. I take strong exception to some of what is said as that is neither our practice as a company nor mine as an individual. Regards Michael -----Original Message----- From: "John Walubengo" <jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke> Sent: 22/09/05 12:11:11 To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Cc: "kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke" <kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke> Subject: Re: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers "On 21 Sep 2005, at 22:06, Brian Longwe wrote: I'm not taking sides here, just asking questions that I think should straighten what is clearly spurios reasoning..." Unlike Brian, I do wish I could take sides on this one...but this issue is too complex and as outsiders, we can only make educated guesses (speculate?). Definately, the 3rd Mobile License Saga is not moving forward as planned. This has created a defacto duopoly that Safaricom and Celtel continue to exploit with impunity (High Calling rates(airtime) for Kenyans when rated Internationally, Lack of Number Portability, poorly implemented EIR (the software that disables stolen phones) system, Unreliable Emergency Service Lines (equivalent to 999 services), Delayed SMS deliveries, Retention of Unused Credit, etc, etc, etc. A 3rd Mobile Service Provider is likely to destroy un-written, cartel agreements that the current service providers are conviniently enjoying. However, the process for inviting the 3rd Operator has been halted in courts and one wonders (and speculates) on whether the delayed processing of resolving issue is not deliberate to perpetuate the status quo... walu. >>> <alice(a)apc.org> 09/22/05 11:39am >>> Brian, I think it was clear that your reference was to the conclusion arrived at by the author of the article. But you do bring into light certain aspects that the author left out which is helpful in understanding the situation. However, I think, it would be even more helpful if journalists could go the extra mile to explain the mechanisms/structures of the industry being reported on and allow readers to make the mental exercise of jumping into conclusions! thanks alice ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Longwe" <cto(a)nbi.ispkenya.com> To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Cc: "Kenya ICT Policy - kictanet" <kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke>; "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 9:04 AM Subject: Re: [Kictanet] Fw: [DigAfrica] How broke company won tender > > On 21 Sep 2005, at 22:06, Brian Longwe wrote: > >> I'm not taking sides here, just asking questions that I think should >> straighten what is clearly spurios reasoning... > > I don't normally reply to my own emails - but I just realised that my > mention of spurious reasoning yesterday might have been misconstrued > to be referring to the comments made by my colleagues Alice and > Florence. I would like to make a correction - I was not referring to > them but rather to the conclusion reached in the press article by the > author, which seem to have been based on questionable sources of > information. > > Apologies to all for any misunderstanding :-) > > Brian > > --- > Submitted by: cto(a)nbi.ispkenya.com 2005-09-22 02:06:01 EDT4 > (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) > --- > You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [alice(a)apc.org] > To unsubscribe, forward this message to > %%email.unsub%% > --- Submitted by: alice(a)apc.org 2005-09-22 04:44:57 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke] To unsubscribe, forward this message to %%email.unsub%% --- Submitted by: John Walubengo <jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke> 2005-09-22 05:13:18 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [MJoseph(a)Safaricom.co.ke] To unsubscribe, forward this message to %%email.unsub%% --- Submitted by: MJoseph(a)Safaricom.co.ke 2005-09-22 12:26:44 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [alice(a)apc.org] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-kiplist-cl-100946B(a)lyris.idrc.ca

1 0

Fw: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers
by alice＠apc.org 22 Sep '05

22 Sep '05

Hi all FYI ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Joseph" <MJoseph(a)Safaricom.co.ke> To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Cc: <kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 7:21 PM Subject: Re: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers Whatever I may say or think, you will probably disagree with me, but the statements contained herein are widely inaccurate, and I am very happy and willing to meet a delegation of this list to clarify and clear up the inaccurate statements. I take strong exception to some of what is said as that is neither our practice as a company nor mine as an individual. Regards Michael -----Original Message----- From: "John Walubengo" <jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke> Sent: 22/09/05 12:11:11 To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Cc: "kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke" <kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke> Subject: Re: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers "On 21 Sep 2005, at 22:06, Brian Longwe wrote: I'm not taking sides here, just asking questions that I think should straighten what is clearly spurios reasoning..." Unlike Brian, I do wish I could take sides on this one...but this issue is too complex and as outsiders, we can only make educated guesses (speculate?). Definately, the 3rd Mobile License Saga is not moving forward as planned. This has created a defacto duopoly that Safaricom and Celtel continue to exploit with impunity (High Calling rates(airtime) for Kenyans when rated Internationally, Lack of Number Portability, poorly implemented EIR (the software that disables stolen phones) system, Unreliable Emergency Service Lines (equivalent to 999 services), Delayed SMS deliveries, Retention of Unused Credit, etc, etc, etc. A 3rd Mobile Service Provider is likely to destroy un-written, cartel agreements that the current service providers are conviniently enjoying. However, the process for inviting the 3rd Operator has been halted in courts and one wonders (and speculates) on whether the delayed processing of resolving issue is not deliberate to perpetuate the status quo... walu. >>> <alice(a)apc.org> 09/22/05 11:39am >>> Brian, I think it was clear that your reference was to the conclusion arrived at by the author of the article. But you do bring into light certain aspects that the author left out which is helpful in understanding the situation. However, I think, it would be even more helpful if journalists could go the extra mile to explain the mechanisms/structures of the industry being reported on and allow readers to make the mental exercise of jumping into conclusions! thanks alice ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Longwe" <cto(a)nbi.ispkenya.com> To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Cc: "Kenya ICT Policy - kictanet" <kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke>; "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 9:04 AM Subject: Re: [Kictanet] Fw: [DigAfrica] How broke company won tender > > On 21 Sep 2005, at 22:06, Brian Longwe wrote: > >> I'm not taking sides here, just asking questions that I think should >> straighten what is clearly spurios reasoning... > > I don't normally reply to my own emails - but I just realised that my > mention of spurious reasoning yesterday might have been misconstrued > to be referring to the comments made by my colleagues Alice and > Florence. I would like to make a correction - I was not referring to > them but rather to the conclusion reached in the press article by the > author, which seem to have been based on questionable sources of > information. > > Apologies to all for any misunderstanding :-) > > Brian > > --- > Submitted by: cto(a)nbi.ispkenya.com 2005-09-22 02:06:01 EDT4 > (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) > --- > You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [alice(a)apc.org] > To unsubscribe, forward this message to > %%email.unsub%% > --- Submitted by: alice(a)apc.org 2005-09-22 04:44:57 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke] To unsubscribe, forward this message to %%email.unsub%% --- Submitted by: John Walubengo <jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke> 2005-09-22 05:13:18 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [MJoseph(a)Safaricom.co.ke] To unsubscribe, forward this message to %%email.unsub%% --- Submitted by: MJoseph(a)Safaricom.co.ke 2005-09-22 12:26:44 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [alice(a)apc.org] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-kiplist-cl-100946B(a)lyris.idrc.ca

1 0

Re: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers
by Michael Joseph 22 Sep '05

22 Sep '05

Whatever I may say or think, you will probably disagree with me, but the statements contained herein are widely inaccurate, and I am very happy and willing to meet a delegation of this list to clarify and clear up the inaccurate statements. I take strong exception to some of what is said as that is neither our practice as a company nor mine as an individual. Regards Michael -----Original Message----- From: "John Walubengo" <jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke> Sent: 22/09/05 12:11:11 To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Cc: "kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke" <kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke> Subject: Re: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers "On 21 Sep 2005, at 22:06, Brian Longwe wrote: I'm not taking sides here, just asking questions that I think should straighten what is clearly spurios reasoning..." Unlike Brian, I do wish I could take sides on this one...but this issue is too complex and as outsiders, we can only make educated guesses (speculate?). Definately, the 3rd Mobile License Saga is not moving forward as planned. This has created a defacto duopoly that Safaricom and Celtel continue to exploit with impunity (High Calling rates(airtime) for Kenyans when rated Internationally, Lack of Number Portability, poorly implemented EIR (the software that disables stolen phones) system, Unreliable Emergency Service Lines (equivalent to 999 services), Delayed SMS deliveries, Retention of Unused Credit, etc, etc, etc. A 3rd Mobile Service Provider is likely to destroy un-written, cartel agreements that the current service providers are conviniently enjoying. However, the process for inviting the 3rd Operator has been halted in courts and one wonders (and speculates) on whether the delayed processing of resolving issue is not deliberate to perpetuate the status quo... walu. >>> <alice(a)apc.org> 09/22/05 11:39am >>> Brian, I think it was clear that your reference was to the conclusion arrived at by the author of the article. But you do bring into light certain aspects that the author left out which is helpful in understanding the situation. However, I think, it would be even more helpful if journalists could go the extra mile to explain the mechanisms/structures of the industry being reported on and allow readers to make the mental exercise of jumping into conclusions! thanks alice ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Longwe" <cto(a)nbi.ispkenya.com> To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Cc: "Kenya ICT Policy - kictanet" <kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke>; "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl(a)lyris.idrc.ca> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 9:04 AM Subject: Re: [Kictanet] Fw: [DigAfrica] How broke company won tender > > On 21 Sep 2005, at 22:06, Brian Longwe wrote: > >> I'm not taking sides here, just asking questions that I think should >> straighten what is clearly spurios reasoning... > > I don't normally reply to my own emails - but I just realised that my > mention of spurious reasoning yesterday might have been misconstrued > to be referring to the comments made by my colleagues Alice and > Florence. I would like to make a correction - I was not referring to > them but rather to the conclusion reached in the press article by the > author, which seem to have been based on questionable sources of > information. > > Apologies to all for any misunderstanding :-) > > Brian > > --- > Submitted by: cto(a)nbi.ispkenya.com 2005-09-22 02:06:01 EDT4 > (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) > --- > You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [alice(a)apc.org] > To unsubscribe, forward this message to > %%email.unsub%% > --- Submitted by: alice(a)apc.org 2005-09-22 04:44:57 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-kiplist-cl-102682Q(a)lyris.idrc.ca --- Submitted by: John Walubengo <jwalubengo(a)kcct.ac.ke> 2005-09-22 05:13:18 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [MJoseph(a)Safaricom.co.ke] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-kiplist-cl-90993H(a)lyris.idrc.ca

1 0

Fw: [APC Forum] Handbook for Bloggers and Cyber-dissidents (+FR)]
by alice＠apc.org 22 Sep '05

22 Sep '05

Reporters Without Borders presents the Handbook for Bloggers and Cyber-dissidents Available at www.rsf.org >Reporters Without Borders today publishes a >Handbook for Bloggers and Cyber-Dissidents (in >English, French, Chinese, Arabic and Persian), in >which experts and bloggers from all over the >world advise Internet users, especially those in >repressive countries, how to set up their own >blogs and get them known, while preserving their >personal anonymity. > >Create your own blog, remain anonymous and get round censorship! > >Blogs get people excited. Or else they disturb >and worry them. Some people distrust them. Others >see them as the vanguard of a new information >revolution. Because they allow and encourage >ordinary people to speak up, they're tremendous >tools of freedom of expression. > >Bloggers are often the only real journalists in >countries where the mainstream media is censored >or under pressure. Only they provide independent >news, at the risk of displeasing the government >and sometimes courting arrest. > >Reporters Without Borders has produced this >handbook to help them, with handy tips and >technical advice on how to remain anonymous and >to get round censorship, by choosing the most >suitable method for each situation. It also >explains how to set up and make the most of a >blog, to publicise it (getting it picked up >efficiently by search-engines) and to establish >its credibility through observing basic ethical >and journalistic principles. > >Many Internet experts helped produce this manual, >including US journalist Dan Gillmor, Canadian >specialist in Internet censorship Nart >Villeneuve, US blogger Jay Rosen and other >bloggers from all over the world. > >The Handbook for Bloggers and Cyber-dissidents >will be on sale in bookshops from 22 September >for ¤10. It can also be downloaded in five >languages (English, French, Chinese, Arabic and >Persian) from the Reporters Without Borders >website: www.rsf.org. > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Guide pratique du blogger et du cyberdissident > >Disponible intégralement sur www.rsf.org > > >Reporters sans frontières publie aujourd'hui, en >cinq langues (français, anglais, persan, chinois, >arabe), un "guide pratique du blogger et du >cyberdissident". Des spécialistes de l'Internet >et des bloggers des quatre coins du globe ont >participé à ce projet, qui vise à aider les >internautes, en particulier ceux qui vivent dans >des pays répressifs, à créer leur publication en >ligne et à la faire connaître, tout en préservant >leur anonymat. > >Créez votre blog, préservez votre anonymat et contournez la censure ! > >Les blogs passionnent, inquiètent, dérangent, >interpellent. Certains les méprisent, d'autres >les tiennent pour les prophètes d'une nouvelle >révolution de l'information. De fait, parce >qu'ils délient les langues des citoyens >ordinaires, ils sont un formidable outil pour la >liberté d'expression. Dans les pays où la censure >est reine, lorsque les médias traditionnels >vivent à l'ombre du pouvoir, les bloggers sont >souvent les seuls véritables journalistes. Ils >sont les seuls à publier une information >indépendante, quitte à déplaire à leur >gouvernement et pasrfois au risque de leur >liberté. Reporters sans frontières a conçu ce >guide pour les aider, par des conseils pratiques >et des astuces techniques, à préserver leur >anonymat, à contourner la censure - en >identifiant la technique la mieux adaptée à >chaque situation -, mais aussi à lancer un blog >dans de bonnes conditions, à le faire connaître - >en optimisant son référencement sur les moteurs >de recherche -, et à asseoir sa crédibilité via >le respect de quelques règles éthiques et >journalistiques. > >De nombreux experts de l'Internet ont participé à >ce guide, dont le journaliste américain Dan >Gillmor, les journalistes français de >pointblog.com, ainsi que des bloggers des quatre >coins du monde. > >Depuis le 22 septembre, le Guide pratique du >blogger et du cyberdissident est disponible en >librairie (10 euros). Il est également possible >de le télécharger, en cinq langues (français, >anglais, chinois, arabe et persan), sur le site >de Reporters sans frontières : www.rsf.org. > > > >Julien Pain >Bureau Internet et libertés / Internet Freedom desk >___________________________________________ > >Reporters sans frontières / Reporters Without Borders >TEL: ++ 33 (0) 1 44 83 84 71 >FAX: ++ 33 (0) 1 45 23 11 51 >internet(a)rsf.org >www.internet.rsf.org > >Read our annual report on the state of online >freedom in more than 60 countries - The Internet >Under Surveillance : >http://www.rsf.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=433 > >Consultez notre rapport annuel "Internet sous >surveillance", qui détaille la situation de la >liberté d'expression sur le Net dans près de >soixante pays : >http://www.rsf.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=432 > > >-- >Working List of the WSIS Human Rights Caucus >Web site : http://www.iris.sgdg.org/actions/smsi/hr-wsis >Public Archives: http://www.iris.sgdg.org/actions/smsi/hr-wsis/list >To post a message to the list, send an email to: hr-wsis(a)iris.sgdg.org >To subscribe/unsubscribe, send an email to: Meryem.Marzouki(a)iris.sgdg.org ============= APC Forum is a meeting place for the APC community - people and institutions who are or have been involved in collaboration with APC, and share the APC vision - a world in which all people have easy, equal and affordable access to the creative potential of information and communication technologies (ICTs) to improve their lives and create more democratic and egalitarian societies. _______________________________________________ apc.forum mailing list apc.forum(a)lists.apc.org http://lists.apc.org/mailman/listinfo/apc.forum

1 0

Re: Duopoly by Mobile Service Providers
by Mike Jensen 22 Sep '05

22 Sep '05

On Thu, 2005-09-22 at 08:40 +0300, John Walubengo wrote: > A 3rd Mobile Service Provider is likely to destroy un-written, cartel agreements that the current service providers are conviniently enjoying. Not necessarily - the entrance of the 3rd mobile operator in South Africa did nothing to change prices or service levels...perhaps a 4th might help:-/ mike

2 1