DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Routing around damage from Selective Censorship/exclusion to:Re: [ga] Courtesy Copies of Postings

Patrick and all remaining assembly members,

Patrick Corliss wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Roberto Gaetano <ga_chair@hotmail.com>
> To: <jo-uk@rcn.com>; <jandl@jandl.com>; <ga@dnso.org>; <Harald@Alvestrand.no>;
> <webmaster@babybows.com>; <DEvans@doc.gov>; <icann-board@icann.org>;
> <icann@icann.org>; <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>; <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>;
> <baf@fausett.com>; <froomkin@law.miami.edu>; <ERIC@hi-tek.com>
> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 12:50 AM (AEST)
> Subject: Re: [ga] vote appeal
> Hi Roberto
> Can somebody please tell me why we need to copy everybody in the world?
> In particular why  <icann-board@icann.org> and <icann@icann.org> > ?

  The <icann-board@icann.org> Addr was added by me Patrick.  I did so
so as to keep the BoD advised of the inane practices of SELECTIVE
CENSORSHIP that the DNSO GA ex-Chair and Ex-Altchair had imposed
against my self and the exclusion of a number of other participants to the
GA List with rules which is posted to all of the GA participants.  It is
commonly known as "Routing around Damage" approach to illegitimate
set of rules that the current GA list situation is unfortunately saddled with.

> This is a poor practice, imo, which should be tempered with common sense.

  Yes it should, your absolutely correct.  So should participation on the
DNSO GA List with rules.  As well as the rules should be a reflection of
the GA by vote.  Currently this is decidedly NOT the case, hence the
need for "Routing around Damage"...

> (1)    It's just not practical for all mail of all constituencies to be copied
> to ICANN.  If they are interested in the GA proceedings, they can subscribe to
> the list themselves.

  Which list?  There are two.  Which leads to the confusion and is a significant
part of the existing problem.  Hence again, the need to "Route Around Damage"
approach so as to have any participant's voice and ideas be read/heard.

> (2)    The only reason to copy anybody OFF list is as a courtesy when they are
> referenced in the email itself.  This is most likely to apply to academics and
> those in senior positions.

  In you opinion maybe.  Others obviously disagree.  Hence again the "CC's".

> (3)    People on the [ga] list gets a copy anyway, they do not need multiple
> copies.  In fact this might be confusing for those who are not subscribed to
> ga-full.

  I am subscribed to the GA-Full as well as the GA with Rules.  Yet only the
GA with rules is posted to the address ga@dnso.org.  And again the crux of the
problem requiring for some posts to "CC" the other known participants.

> However, I would support ONE extra copy where the reply is directly addressed to
> a person (as I have done with this posting).  This allows the addressee more
> time to respond and is a useful mechanism for easier sorting and filtering of
> mail according to the people involved.

  How magnanimous of you!

> Best regards
> Patrick Corliss
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>