I see a rule in the charter that an organisation should be the exclusive user of at least one domain name. I see no restriction that this domain name be non-commercial. The domain name http://www.kaswesha.kbo.co.ke/ clearly resolves to ' a website controlled by and representing the Member Organization', thus satisfying requirement 2.2.1.2.2 of the charter. 

So the problem McTim is worrying about here appears to be due to a misapprehension. The Kaswesha domain name looks to satisfy the membership requirement to me.

I thank Milton for his explanation of the reason for the domain name application, and its origins in the deep differences between the GNSO and ALAC mission. 

Cheers

David

On 17/11/2011, at 7:54 PM, McTim wrote:

> On 11/17/11, William Drake <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> How to reconcile these two statements is a conundrum….
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> On the specifics of this application, while I am sure that KASWESHA is
> a non-commercial organisation, the fact that they have a .co.ke might
> be disqualifying.  I think this is unfair.
> 
> The domain kbo.co.ke is a multistakeholder PPP with the GoKenya,
> Google, KENIC and others coming together to make it easy to get "kenya
> Buisnesses Online", hence kbo.co.ke.
> 
> It's a free service, so fairly popular.
> 
> How does the NCSG-EC reconcile inclusion with rigid rules?
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> 
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
> route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel