Re: [ga] Throw-away PR - is that what you want?

[jefsey <jefsey@club-internet.fr>]

On 20:42 09/05/02, Thomas Roessler said:
>On 2002-05-09 13:39:57 -0400, James Love wrote:
>>Is there a "PR value" in a statement from the GA?  I would 
>>hope  so.  That would mean that people actually care what the GA says. 
>>How could this not be clear, both on and off list?  And how would
>>it be a bad thing if a GA statement was actually noticed by people?
>
>What a wonderful world - Ralph Nader's Consumer Project on Technology (and 
>its director, James Love) doing free PR for the DNSO's General Assembly.

Dear Thomas,
what is bluntly wrong with you? That you oppose I understand. That you are 
bitter. That I understand. But this?

It really looks as if you were jealous consumers vs @large. They/we are the 
same.
I believe I read WXW or the Crispy Crockets. Them I understand their 
reasons, but you?

>Bad enough, what I've seen so far points in the opposite direction:  The 
>Consumer Project on Technology's director trying to abuse the GA as a 
>throw-away public relations tool.

Who do you heared that from. From NC's people. Who is lobbying you?

>So, once again, the question to everyone involved with this: Do you want 
>that?  Do you really think that a little PR booster for a campaign of 
>CPTech is worth giving up on the GA?

Is that from you ??? or is that from Marilyn, Alexander and Joe?

>Think twice, and respond, please.  Your responses may quite well influence 
>what's going to happen.

Could you please be clearer.
What is going to happen is a vote. Everyone is, will be asked to respond. 
Some will say yes, sor will say no. This will certainly influence the 
result of the vote.

What do you mean in calling for a vote before a vote?
Or do you imply threads, from what you heard, from what you have been told?
That if we go ahead with a vote there would be ... there would be what? the 
closure of the GA list?
Before we can tune that motion enough to be the GA's one and not the one of 
Jamie.

hmmm. Unless you are clearer, it seems only to show that the GA carry some 
weight.
Please be clearer. We are certaily listening, be I/we do not understand. 
May be my low IQ: sorry.
jfc









>--
>Thomas Roessler                          http://log.does-not-exist.org/
>--
>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
>
>
>
>
>
>---
>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 19/04/02
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 19/04/02