<div dir="ltr"><div>Dear friends, brothers and sisters.</div><div><br></div><div>Please,do forgive me in expressing such a crude manner my total disapproval of a debate that does not need to take place in this period of an election.</div><div>Unless it is "a coup d'etat" ...</div><div><br></div><div>My humble opinion is that the NCSG must think then to set up a body to which to refer to in case of contested election if the Ombudsman does not already plays that role.</div><div><br></div><div>Therefore, It's more wise for us to expect the announcement of election results before embarking on debates that divide us more than they bring us together.</div><div><br></div><div>What do you think about my proposal, dear all?</div><div><br></div><div>A wise man,coming from the South.</div><div>-Olévié- with my warm regards</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2016-08-29 20:01 GMT+01:00 Dan Krimm <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dan@musicunbound.com" target="_blank">dan@musicunbound.com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p>Paul,</p>
<p>The motivation for the appeal was primarily about process, from
the get-go (it's not that likely that NotA will actually have a
practical effect in this election, though certainly not
impossible). The EC-suggested changes include some that are
indeed substantive with respect to process (administrative
process, not electoral process), and would set a historical
precedent that would influence similar situations in the future,
since this is the first time such an appeal has been lodged. It
is important for the EC to explicitly acknowledge that there was a
compromise (appellants did not get everything we asked for) and
that the appeal was settled, not withdrawn. Why should the EC
object to such a characterization? It is an accurate one, and
should be a clear part of the historical record.<br>
</p>
<p>This is all about the working relationship between the EC and
members at large when a dispute arises, and details such as this
are important to get right at the outset. As an original signer
of the appeal, I approve of getting this worked out explicitly,
and not just letting it slide. If we're "making sausage" here,
then let's put it on the record without any whitewash!<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
</font></span></p><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<p>Dan<br>
</p></font></span><div><div class="h5">
<br>
<div>On 8/29/16 5:57 AM, Paul Rosenzweig
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">Really?
That’s your best argument? That two ministerial changes in
the last paragraphs that have no effect on substance have
somehow “re-inflam[ed]” your mistrust. Exactly why? You
object to this compromise not being called a compromise and
not being asked if you are satisfied, as if you need
validation? That’s hardly grounds for mistrust. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">I
have no idea why one person on the EC suggested these
changes; I have no idea either why you are objecting. For
the most part they look like a fight over whether to use
“happy” or “glad” in a sentence – it seems some people are
just looking for a fight. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">Here's
a thought: Since, substantively, the letter is exactly what
Tapani said it was going to be, how about we just let the EC
do its job?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">Paul<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">Paul
Rosenzweig<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"><a href="mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com" target="_blank"><span style="color:#0563c1">paul.rosenzweig@<wbr>redbranchconsulting.com</span></a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">O:
<a href="tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20547-0660" value="+12025470660" target="_blank">+1 (202) 547-0660</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">M:
<a href="tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20329-9650" value="+12023299650" target="_blank">+1 (202) 329-9650</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">VOIP:
<a href="tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20738-1739" value="+12027381739" target="_blank">+1 (202) 738-1739</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"><a href="http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/" target="_blank"><span style="color:#0563c1">www.redbranchconsulting.com</span></a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">My
PGP Key: <a href="http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/" target="_blank"><span style="color:#0563c1">http://redbranchconsulting.<wbr>com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/</span></a>
</span><u><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#0563c1"><u></u><u></u></span></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">
Mueller, Milton L [<a href="mailto:milton@gatech.edu" target="_blank">mailto:milton@gatech.edu</a>] <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, August 28, 2016 9:17 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Paul Rosenzweig
<a href="mailto:paul.rosenzweig@REDBRANCHCONSULTING.COM" target="_blank"><paul.rosenzweig@<wbr>REDBRANCHCONSULTING.COM></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" target="_blank">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: EC response to the By Laws Section
2.4.2.1 Appeal on the election process<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Paul<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">If there's no difference between the two
then why did the person who proposed the revision hold up
the entire process with it?<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Your comparison only focuses on the NOTA
paragraph and does not include the entire letter. There were
other changes. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I think what people were objecting to was
that the final 2 paragraphs of the revised version
eliminated all references to a compromise, and no longer
asked whether the appellant's felt that their appeal had
been satisfied. If those seemingly little changes are
slipped in one has to wonder what the person who proposed
them was thinking. Whoever proposed these changes did a
great job of re-inflaming the mistrust that fueled the
appeal to begin with. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
Milton L Mueller <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Professor, School of Public Policy<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Georgia Institute of Technology<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
On Aug 28, 2016, at 17:15, Paul Rosenzweig <<a href="mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com" target="_blank">paul.rosenzweig@<wbr>REDBRANCHCONSULTING.COM</a>>
wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>I’m glad everyone has so
much time on the weekend to nit-pick the process. Since
we are asking for clarification, I’d like to ask why
anyone on the EC sees any difference between the first
draft language below and the proposed revision? In
other words, since they obviously mean the exact same
thing, why is anyone in the EC concerned about either
draft which seem to me just clarifications of each
other?</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Paul</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>FIRST DRAFT</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>which means that with
respect to the election for</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>GNSO Council, those
candidates who receive less votes than “None of the</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Above” (NOTA) on the ballot
shall not be elected to the GNSO Council in</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>this year’s election. Any
candidate who ties with NOTA in number of votes</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>is elected.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">SECOND
DRAFT</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>In that</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>meeting, we decided a
solution that addressed the nota votes to clarify for</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>the community that
candidates *with less votes than nota lose, **and the*</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>*s**ame number as nota is
enough to get in. **This solution **is to enable</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>the current election to
continue and address the concerns in the Letter of</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Appeal.*</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">Paul
Rosenzweig</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"><a href="mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com" target="_blank"><span style="color:#0563c1">paul.rosenzweig@<wbr>redbranchconsulting.com</span></a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">O:
<a href="tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20547-0660" value="+12025470660" target="_blank">+1 (202) 547-0660</a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">M:
<a href="tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20329-9650" value="+12023299650" target="_blank">+1 (202) 329-9650</a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">VOIP:
<a href="tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20738-1739" value="+12027381739" target="_blank">+1 (202) 738-1739</a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"><a href="http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/" target="_blank"><span style="color:#0563c1">www.redbranchconsulting.com</span></a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">My
PGP Key: <a href="http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/" target="_blank"><span style="color:#0563c1">http://redbranchconsulting.<wbr>com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/</span></a>
</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">
NCSG-Discuss [<a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" target="_blank">mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.<wbr>SYR.EDU</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Tamir Israel<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, August 28, 2016 1:41 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@listserv.syr.edu" target="_blank">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: EC response to the By Laws
Section 2.4.2.1 Appeal on the election process</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Hi,<br>
<br>
Maybe someone from the exec committee can explain what (if
anything) was wrong with the text as here:<br>
<a href="http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/ec-ncsg/2016-August/001133.html" target="_blank">http://mailman.ipjustice.org/<wbr>pipermail/ec-ncsg/2016-August/<wbr>001133.html</a><br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Tamir<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 8/27/2016 6:42 PM, Mueller, Milton
L wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I
read some of these messages and I am unable to
understand what is going on in EC. </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I
was especially disturbed about this message from Joan
Kerr:</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Â </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>This is a great time to take a
break and review the agreement we had on the</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>call. Perhaps then after
reflection, we can address the response directly</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>and concisely.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Â </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I
am sorry, but I don’t see this as a great time to
“take a break.â€</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">
I, and I think most of the SG, think this is the time
to finish what you started, and to realize that the
SG’s unity and the legitimacy and respect of the EC
will be eroded if you don’t. </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Â </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">The
EC needs to issue a statement settling the appeal
immediately. The essence of the agreement was already
conveyed to the NCSG by Tapani. I cannot understand
why the EC is dithering over this. </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Â </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">--MM</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="m_-5069893613455372303__MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Â </span></a><u></u><u></u></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
NCSG-Discuss [<a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" target="_blank">mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.<wbr>SYR.EDU</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Tatiana Tropina<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, August 27, 2016 6:27 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" target="_blank">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> EC response to the By Laws
Section 2.4.2.1 Appeal on the election process</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Â <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Dear all,<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Â <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Last week EC seemed to
quickly resolve the Appeal on the election
process, that challenged the interpretation of
NOTA votes. As far as I remember, those who
signed the appeal were told that they would get
a timely response from the EC which would seal
this deal. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Â <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">However, up to now I have not
seen anything coming from the EC on the list on
this matter. I checked the public archives, and
I see that EC is still debating how to word it's
compromise. It worries me a bit because world is
moving on and we're going ahead with this
election. When I read the emails on the public
NCSG EC thread, I really wonder what's going on
and whether EC is trying to, pardon me for the
lame pun attempt, to compromise the compromise.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Â <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">As far as I understand,
yesterday EC almost agreed on sending the
response: <a href="http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/ec-ncsg/2016-August/001133.html" target="_blank">http://mailman.ipjustice.org/<wbr>pipermail/ec-ncsg/2016-August/<wbr>001133.html</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Â <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">However, today the
temperature changed and I see that the text is
still debated and, frankly speaking, it does
look like what we agreed upon is still
considered as not being agreed:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Â <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/ec-ncsg/2016-August/001134.html" target="_blank">http://mailman.ipjustice.org/<wbr>pipermail/ec-ncsg/2016-August/<wbr>001134.html</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/ec-ncsg/2016-August/001140.html" target="_blank">http://mailman.ipjustice.org/<wbr>pipermail/ec-ncsg/2016-August/<wbr>001140.html</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Â <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I know that it's weekend, but
since I see that EC has been debating the things
today, may I kindly ask anyone from the EC
update us on what is actually happing with the
EC response to the appeal? I believe those who
signed the appeal didn't submit it with the
intent to wait till the end of elections, when
it will be too late.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Â <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks a lot!<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Warm regards<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Â <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Tatiana <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Â <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><span style="font-family:times new roman,serif"><font size="1"><b>Olévié Ayaovi Agbenyo KOUAMI</b><br></font></span></div><div><span style="font-family:times new roman,serif"><font size="1"><i>Co-Gérantt de O and K IT SOLUTIONS sarl </i></font></span><span><span style="font-family:times new roman,serif"><font size="1"><i>Editeur de logiciels de gestion (PGI/ERP) S.I.G.E. (http://<a href="http://www.oandkit.com" target="_blank">www.oandkit.com</a>)</i></font></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family:times new roman,serif"><font size="1"><i>Président/CEO de l'INTIC4DEV (Institut des TIC pour le développement) </i></font></span><font face="times new roman, serif" size="1"><i><a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/1064246710336502/" target="_blank">https://www.facebook.com/groups/1064246710336502/</a></i></font><span style="font-family:times new roman,serif"><font size="1"><i><br></i></font></span></div><div><i style="font-size:x-small;font-family:"times new roman",serif">Eminent National Expert for the World Summit Award (<a href="http://www.wsis-award.org" target="_blank">http://www.wsis-award.org</a>) </i><br></div><div><span style="font-family:times new roman,serif"><font size="1"><i>Secrétaire Général de l'ESTETIC - Association Togolaise des professionnels des TIC (<a href="http://www.estetic.tg" target="_blank">http://www.estetic.tg</a>)<br></i></font></span></div><div><span style="font-family:times new roman,serif"><font size="1"><i>ICANN-GNSO-NCSG-NPOC (<a href="http://www.npoc.org/" target="_blank">http://www.npoc.org/</a>) </i><i><span>ICANN - Fellow & Alumni<i> (<a href="http://www.icann.org" target="_blank">http://www.icann.org</a>) - </i></span>Membre de Internet Society (http://<a href="http://www.isoc.org" target="_blank">www.isoc.org</a>)-</i></font></span><span style="font-family:times new roman,serif"><font size="1"><i>Membre fondateur du RIK-Togo (Réseau Interprofessionnel du Karité au Togo) </i></font></span><span><span style="font-family:times new roman,serif"><font size="1">(<a href="http://www.globalshea.com" target="_blank">http://www.globalshea.com</a>)</font></span></span></div></div><div><span style="font-family:times new roman,serif"><font size="1"><span><i>Skype : olevie1 FaceBook : @olivier.kouami.3 Twitter : #oleviek Lomé – Togo</i></span></font></span></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div>