DNSO Mailling lists archives


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

[ga] Motion - Chair and Co-Chair

Hi Sotiris

Danny and I are two separate people.  Please distinguish us.

I really have no idea what you are talking about in relation to "outside"
mailing lists.  As you know I had nothing to do with the WG-Review.

Anything said by Danny on that subject was on his own initiative.  I have
neither agreed with it or opposed it.  In fact I know nothing about any
outside lists except what has been posted onlist by you and others.

William X. Walsh is running his own agenda for his own reasons.  I have
deliberately avoided arguing with him as he is currently suspended and
invisible to most of the list.  It would thus be a one-sided debate unless I
reposted his arguments so that I could reply to them.

Plus it would be yet another "flame war" and most counter-productive.

I also think the patience of the list members has been sorely tested by the
constant barrage of criticism which any fair-minded person on the list knows
to be quite without substance.  My private posting that triggered off this
whole campaign had ONE single comment that Mr Walsh took exception to.  That
was my suggestion in the first sentence in the last of the four paragraphs.

As any impartial observer would know, my comments were urging caution in a
obviously futile attempt to avoid adding fuel to the flame war.  I wrote
cautiously and diplomatically saying things like "personal nature" instead
of "personal attack, insults or slander" per the rules.  I said:

> You are not in a position to judge how many complaints are received on a
> daily basis in respect of comments such as these.  The fact that people
> are disposed to make complaints suggests that the issue of "ad hominem"
> attacks is a matter of concern.
> The posting by Kent Crispin falls into the category of making comments of
> a personal nature.  It suggests that Michael Froomkin is biased.  Chris
> Ambler's response was unfair as he attributed to Kent Crispin what was
> said by Dave Crocker.
> All you are doing is undermining the integrity of the list.
> If you want to discuss the rules, please do so without discussing cases
> which may come before the List Monitors.  I'll post an extract of the
> rules onlist

In relation to my so-called "conflict of interest" this was debated during
the election campaign and everyone had the opportunity to submit another
vote.  It was also put to a formal vote by the Names Council, after comments
on that very issue, and ratified by them.

Since I have been Co-Chair I have said very little in support of
"alternative roots" except that I agreed with Danny that there should be a
separate mailing list.  I gave simple reasons without any emotive argument.
Danny has no conflict of interest on this subject, real or imagined.

I have also prepared an agenda that includes every issue that I could think
of that ought to be discussed including issues that I might personally
oppose.  As David Farrar wrote:

> I do actually share some of the concerns about how much our new Chairs
> will push the GA agenda rather than a personal one.  But at this stage
> it is only concern and they should be given the chance to prove
> themselves.

Thank you, David.  The word "will" clearly means it hasn't happened yet.  No
system in the world will blame somebody for something they "might" do.  My
personal agenda is to gain consensus within the GA to identify and resolve
the problems which most people can see are obvious.  They include trying to
make this body function properly and be respected.

I'd appreciate it if everybody else would try to make this forum work.

Best regards
Patrick Corliss

----- Original Message -----
From: Sotiris <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>
To: William X. Walsh <william@userfriendly.com>
Cc: ga <ga@dnso.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 8:59 AM
Subject: Re: [ga] Reposting

> "William X. Walsh" wrote:
> > Incidents like this only further the fact that the Chair and
> > Alternative Chair are way too politically tied to their positions to
> > be able to be impartial and fair chairs to this assembly.
> >
> > A petition to the Names Council for their removal is probably in order
> > at this stage, if not overdue.
> If this is a motion, I second it.
> Sincerely,
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> --
> 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

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 >>>