Lug, The .UG debate is interesting, well CFI currently has all the rights, and they have done a pretty good job. If UCC wants to take over, this is not a bad thing.
What happens if the recession hits CFI, and for some reason, the company shuts down (sic). For purposes of continuity, the .ug domain names have to be under the control of a body which will live forever (until Jesus comes back - if u r Christian) The issue of blockades (read blocking radiokatwe.com) will happen whether, CFI, UCC, or a non profit manages this. A call from above, will shut down a website. I wonder why its called "a call from above not below" personally, i would not lose sleep over this issue, if UCC wants to take over, its easy, let them compensate CFI, especially, since CFI has expressed willingness to handover in exchange for a few silver coins. I think UCC should choose better fights. They can start one on slow internet, which is caused by several factors, including Monopoly, barriers to new players, mafia inter connection rates in the telecom industry, among others. My guts tell me, they are looking at a quick buck in this. First of all the tax on telecoms, which goes directly to UCC is a bribe, and a real case of conflict of interest. Any tax, from telecoms and ISPs, should never end up in UCC. UCC is funded by tax payers, so this money should go to the consolidated fund. This state of events, is nothing short of a circus. regards Cavin "Spain wins SA 2010 world Cup - Fernado Torres (El Nino), any doubters? - am still accepting bets" > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. The .UG issue - Wire's Perspective (Wire James) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 09:05:58 +0300 > From: Wire James <[email protected]> > Subject: [LUG] The .UG issue - Wire's Perspective > To: LUG <[email protected]> > Cc: ikargs <[email protected]>, Lillian Nalwoga <[email protected]>, > otunnu <[email protected]>, pmwesigwa <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <1278309960.4240.26.ca...@wire> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > I have read through the comments made on this subject and indeed while I > concur with the fact that some polishing is needed on the way forward > with the .ug, there are facts we can not keep hiding away from. What are > those facts? > > 1. The .ug is a national resource that can not be left in the hands of a > private company for good. While CFI has done a good job in getting us > where we are today, the time has come for a change in the administration > of this resource. The Government needs a say however small or big. The > civil society and private sector also deserve a say too and that is why > the proposal of forming a body that brings together the different > parties is a good idea. As to whether we are copying what has been done > elsewhere in E.A, that is a non-issue. For all the threats of Govt > regulation, I say UCC go ahead and have a say in this .ug issue. > > 2. I concur with the separation of the Technical and Administrative > management of this resource. While we can outsource the company to > manage the technical aspects (through a bidding system), we need to have > a more representative administrative design that caters for all the > interests including those of yours truly (the Govt). I wonder why we > never want Govt to have a say in matters that have a direct relation to > national identity. Dispute resolution is one other thing that needs to > be looked into. Currently, one may feel cheated if all they have to deal > with is CFI to make a decision on a particular conflict that has arisen > as a result of domain registration. > > 3. A situation where one private company handles the technical, > administrative, dispute resolution etc mgt of this .ug resource is so > unfair and does not bode well for this nation. What happens if that > company closes shop? Depending on individuals for such a serious > national resource is the epitome of poor planning IMHO. > > 4. We need to be able to start collecting more information about > this .ug resource but in the current way it is managed, some of this > information is treated as 'classified' for reasons you and me are well > aware of. However, if a neutral body was in place, all this > classification would not arise. One example is our failure to have an > accurate online counter for the current status of domain registrations > in UG. I keep being asked time and again how many domains in the various > categories we have as .ug but that information is hard to come by. > researchers are having a problem here. Some one once complained of how > domains were removed from his docket and given to his client yet the > client had not yet paid up for his services. He has never forgiven the > registrar over this. > > 5. Reinier points out an interesting angle. The lack of an incentivised > reseller programme. This is one of the things that has led to the > failure for promotion of .ug by local ICT solutions providers. > > 6. Promotion of the .ug. In its current state, there is little or no > promotion of the .ug in anyway and I would understand why. The only time > I heard an advert on radio was about a year ago but how effective it was > in getting people to embrace the .ug , one still wonders. A separate > administrative body would look into all these issues and ensure that we > start rolling out a massive campaign on the use of the .ug. I dont think > the problem is so much about pricing but more about awareness and > whether people would want to be associated with this resource. You have > to make them like it. > > The writing is on the wall and I am finally happy that UCC is taking > the bull by the horn to see that the .ug changes take place. > > I rest my case. > > Wire > >
_______________________________________________ LUG mailing list [email protected] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. ---------------------------------------
