Michael,<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 3:48 PM, michael gurstein <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurstein@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:</div><div class="gmail_quote">
<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><snip></div><div class="gmail_quote"><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div><div><div class="im"><p class="MsoNormal">I have yet to find anything on FB that is "necessary".<u></u><u></u></p></div><p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">[MG>] I think the example that is generally used is that Ghana first announced its election results on FB… what consequences followed from that (if any) I'm not sure of, but one could imagine how that kind of practice would lead to services/functions that in some contexts are "necessary". </span></i></b></p>
</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I disagree. Posting results on FB and only FB would be a disservice to the citizenry. As one of many outlets, I think it is fine.</div><div><br></div><div>Posting the results on the Internet (on the Election Commission website or official government website) is useful, but that doesn't make a case for global regulation of the network by all Electoral Commissions.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> If mPesa is providing the only </span></i></b></p>
</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>mPesa is one of many, it's not the only.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">"banking" service available for vast numbers of the population of Kenya or wherever, presumably the service can be seen as a "necessary" one and thus subject to some sort of regulation.</span></i></b></p>
</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>mPesa and other mobile money services are heavily regulated in KE and elsewhere in Africa. I have no quibble with this at all. I just don't think we need a CIRP (or something like it) to regulate activity on the Internet.</div>
<div><br></div><div><snip></div><div><br></div><div>At that point, there would need to be a discussion why these "necessary services are on FB and not in the public domain.</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">[MG>] that's a good question and one worth addressing… the idea of a global public domain email service has been mooted from time to time (and I believe something of that sort was established in Sweden through the postal service… As you well know, there are pro's and con's for this… My point though is to simply say that these kinds of matters (and including "private services") need to be examined through a public interest lens.</span></i></b></p>
</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I remain unconvinced that there is need of a global CIRP-like body.</div><div><br></div></div>-- <br>Cheers,<br><br>McTim<br>"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel