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