[council] Cross-posting [ga] and [ga-abuse]. Again.

["Patrick Corliss" <patrick@quad.net.au>]

On Fri, 6 Jul 2001 21:56:03 +1000, I wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2001 10:04:07 +0200 (MET DST), you wrote:
> > ==> I add another subject for all List Monitors and consideration:
> >     about non cross-posting of ga-abuse with others lists.
>
> I'll deal with each issue separately if I may.  I will note, for the
> record, that you remain opposed to that request also.

On Fri, 6 Jul 2001 16:16:38 +0200 (MET DST), you wrote:
> My text is not quoted completely, and the people added in reply
> CC may miss the substance.
> I am very sorry to add to your e-mail work.

Dear Elisabeth

I clearly said that I would deal with each issue separately.  By that I
meant that I would respond in a separate email.  I do not like confusing
two separate issues together.  I have no intention of quoting you out
of context.  Here now is my detailed reply:

On Fri, 6 Jul 2001 10:04:07 +0200 (MET DST), you wrote:
> ==> I add another subject for all List Monitors and consideration:
>     about non cross-posting of ga-abuse with others lists.
>
>     I would not like to see the slitest accusation of Secretariat
>     about filtering and censorship.

Your fears are groundless.  Perhaps you should understand that the Chair and
Alt Chair are taking responsibility for these decisions.

>     The purpose of ga-abuse is to complain. Such complain MUST
>     be allowed to any member of the DNSO (it is - the posting to
>     ga-abuse is allowed to any subscriber to any DNSO list).

I am not suggesting that complaints should not be allowed.

>     Usually complains arrive only to ga-abuse - as Harald mention,
>     there was almost no cross-posting during last 3 months

Harald is quite wrong and I have cited examples to prove it.  That was, in
fact, only ONE month -- not THREE.   He also said "none" not "almost none".

On Wed, 04 Jul 2001 08:43:48 +0200, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> In my personal GA archives over the last month there is not a single
> posting that has been crossposted between ga-abuse and ga@dnso.org.

Not counting two cross-posts from the GA executive (Chair, List Monitor) I
have identified TEN cross-posts between the [ga] list and the [ga-abuse]
list in the period of one month cited by Harald.  These are listed below.

>     (forward from a list is not cross-posting in the technical
>     meaning).

If it appears on BOTH lists it is a cross-posting.  I don't understand any
other meaning.  Please see below for the 10 examples.  They are in the
archives.  Please don't be difficult.  It's just making things worse.

>     Now, if the Lists Monitors consider that the ga-abuse should
>     be non cross-posted (technical meaning of non cross-posting)
>     with other GA lists, I would be grateful you decide it formaly
>     and announce this formal decision to the DNSO.

The decision is one for the Chair-Alternate Chair -- not the List Monitors.
However, my mails have been copied to [ga-abuse] and there has been no
dissent.  I would appreciate you not creating unnecessary obstacles.

I am happy to make an announcement to the [ga] list but cannot do so if you
won't agree in the first instance.  I really have a hard time getting you to
understand.  As I said to you, Philip, the GA and the Names Council on the
[ga] list:

On Wed, 4 Jul 2001 07:59:27 +1000, I wrote:
Subject: Wanton Refusal of Names Council

> In relation to a cross-posting between [ga-abuse] and another list, you
> can set the filters so they reject the [ga-abuse] post, reject the *other*
> post OR reject both posts.
>
> To give both you and Elisabeth the benefit of failing to understand my
> communication, please ask Elisabeth to set the filters so that it rejects
> the OTHER post.  That would be within you so-called *policy* restrictions
> as it would not reject the [ga-abuse] post.

How much clearer do I need to be?  I would dread to think of how many
HUNDREDS of emails have been sent on this subject.  To just about
everyone in the DNSO.  And the work I have to do to prove my case.

And now Roberto has weighed into the debate.  Sheesh !!
What makes it worse is that this is only one minor issue !!

>     Then the Secretariat will set up filters.

Just do it, Elisabeth.  Please.

Best Regards
Patrick Corliss


----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>
To: <ga@dnso.org>; [ga-abuse] <ga-abuse@dnso.org>
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 08:28:35 -0700
Subject: [ga] Perspective

----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>
To: Patrick Corliss <patrick@quad.net.au>; [ga-abuse] <ga-abuse@dnso.org>
Cc: Jefsey Morfin, wanadoo <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>; [ga] <ga@dnso.org>
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 22:02:18 -0700
Subject: Re: [ga] [ga-rules] Mailing List Management

----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>
To: Patrick Corliss <patrick@quad.net.au>; [ga-abuse] <ga-abuse@dnso.org>
Cc: [ga] <ga@dnso.org>; Danny Younger <webmaster@babybows.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 22:20:28 -0700
Subject: Re: [ga] Blending Top-down and Bottoms-up

----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>
To: Alternate Chair <patrick@quad.net.au>; [ga-abuse] <ga-abuse@dnso.org>
Cc: Cade,Marilyn S - LGA <mcade@att.com>; [ga] <ga@dnso.org>
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 22:47:23 -0700
Subject: Re: [ga] GA-REVIEW & Other Mailing Lists

----- Original Message -----
From: William S. Lovell <wsl@cerebalaw.com>
To: Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>
Cc: Patrick Corliss <patrick@quad.net.au>; [ga-abuse] <ga-abuse@dnso.org>;
Jefsey Morfin, wanadoo <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>; [ga] <ga@dnso.org>
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 22:50:13 -0700
Subject: Re: [ga] [ga-rules] Mailing List Management

----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>
To: <wsl@cerebalaw.com>
Cc: Patrick Corliss <patrick@quad.net.au>; [ga-abuse] <ga-abuse@dnso.org>;
Jefsey Morfin, wanadoo <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>; [ga] <ga@dnso.org>
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 23:07:41 -0700
Subject: Re: [ga] [ga-rules] Mailing List Management

----- Original Message -----
From: J. William Semich <bill@mail.nic.nu>
To: Alexander Svensson <alexander@svensson.de>; <eric@hi-tek.com>;
<ga@dnso.org>
Cc: <ga-abuse@dnso.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 11:35:17 -0400
Subject: Re: [ga] [ADMIN] Four Week Suspension of Eric Dierker

----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
To: <webmaster@myprayersite.org>
Cc: <ga@dnso.org>; <ga-abuse@dnso.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 17:24:12 -0700
Subject: Re: [ga] excessive amount of postings -- again

----- Original Message -----
From: William S. Lovell <wsl@cerebalaw.com>
To: William X. Walsh <william@userfriendly.com>; ga@DNSO.org <ga@dnso.org>;
Danny Younger <DannyYounger@cs.com>; Patrick Corliss <patrick@corliss.net>
Cc: <ga-abuse@dnso.org>
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 16:59:32 -0700
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [ga] Some other ideas about the questions... [ga-udrp]
UDRP Questionnaire

----- Original Message -----
From: William X. Walsh <william@userfriendly.com>
To: William S. Lovell <wsl@cerebalaw.com>
Cc: ga@DNSO.org <ga@dnso.org>; Danny Younger <DannyYounger@cs.com>; Patrick
Corliss <patrick@corliss.net>; <ga-abuse@dnso.org>
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 17:35:47 -0700
Subject: Re[2]: Fwd: Re: [ga] Some other ideas about the questions...
[ga-udrp] UDRP Questionnaire