[NCUC-DISCUSS] Bribery at ICANN

[Remmy Nweke]

James to back up the onus of prove, I think the allegation should show
evidence not likely bribery.
So over to Raoul.
Regards
Remmy

On Nov 25, 2016 12:07 PM, "James Gannon" <james at cyberinvasion.net> wrote:

> Im sorry Raoul but I would appreciate if you would engage with my
> questions rather than dismissing them out of hand. These are serious
> concerns, and as someone who has spent almost 3 years working on building
> bridges and relationships in ICANN between us and other stakeholders I
> would like to see you back up your accusations. Conspiracy and fear have no
> place in the ICANN and NCUC I wish to participate in.
>
> So please be more specific, who do you think is being bribed and by whom?
>
> -James
>
> /I have changed the title to split this off from the originating
> conversation./
>
> From: Raoul Plommer <plommer at gmail.com>
> Date: Friday 25 November 2016 at 09:51
> To: James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net>
> Cc: NCUC-discuss <ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>, Johan Helsingius <
> julf at julf.com>
> Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] NomCom Review
>
> This is big business to the tune of billions. I think it's ludicrous to
> state that bribery never takes place in ICANN. People get killed for far
> less monies. But this is besides my point and it's insistence can be seen
> as a willing effort to derail the real conversation we should be having.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20161125/64741335/attachment-0002.html>