Re: [council] Costs and the ga lists

[Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales <vany@sdnp.org.pa>]

Phillip:

I am not agree.  In fact, AFNIC never specified a limited number of
mailing lists to be created or the number of mailing lists they will able
to create and maintain for the money DNSO is paying for such a service.

This means, that in the reality, AFNIC doesn't have any right to charge
additional costs for any additional mailing list created.  If they have a
concern about costs, then they also should inform us when GA wanted 10
mailing lists that they simply won't create them unless DNSO pays more for
that job.

Then in conclussion no extra costs for DNSO exists for creating and
maintaining mailing lists.  This is problem of AFNIC if they doesn't want
to work for the $$$$$$ DNSO is paying for their services.

And for those that works in a voluntary basis they have the option to ask
for help of other voluntary person so not everything is charged in one
person.

Again, at list the 50% of the problem here is not about extra costs...It
is about a deficient organization that then possibly generates
extra-costs.

With regarding GA consulting the NC.  They consulted the NC, they sent an
e-mail requesting such lists and someone authorized the creation of such
lists.

I remember that someone asked what costs would raise to create more
mailing lists.  I was temped to answer, but I was expecting that Elizabeth
do it first, but I have never read an answer from her to such question.
And the lists were simply created!  So, I think that is wrong to say that
the GA didn't consulted and questions didn't were raised.

But don't be blind!!! No more money is needed to be raised for more
mailing lists!!!

What is really needed to do is reorganize responsabilities.

Best Regards
Vany




Best Regards
Vany






On Wed, 16 May 2001, Philip Sheppard wrote:

> Vany,
> The real point of raising the issue about the extra costs off the 6 new ga
> lists was one of procedure. (And to signal to the ga that such things are
> not cost free.)
> The creation of these lists imposes costs on the DNSO secretariat.
> The secretariat is funded by the 7 NC constituencies.
> Sound financial management suggests therefore that the NC should be
> consulted FIRST. We were not. This is the real point.
>
> The wider point is being addressed by the current process to appoint a full
> time secretariat.
>
> Philip
>
>

-- 
Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales
IT Specialist
Sustainable Development Networking Programme/Panama
Tel: (507) 230-4011 ext 213
Fax: (507) 230-3455
e-mail: vany@sdnp.org.pa
http://www.sdnp.org.pa