VR, max 5 and voting (was:Re: [ga] Virtual reality)

[Mikael Pawlo <mikael@pawlo.com>]

On Fri, 3 Dec 1999, Patrick Greenwell wrote:
> > In my humble opinion, if the addresses are invalid for nomation and voting
> > they should not be valid for subscription to the various mailing lists
> > hosted by the DNSO. Freedom of speech issus might be considered, but I
> > guess that kind of issues will only be relevant to real, existing people. 
> The danger in this is the complete lack of vetted, objective,
> clearly-defined procedures to do so. Instead actions have been taken 
> on an ad-hoc and discriminatory basis without any possible recourse.
(---)

Fair enough. How about limiting the amount of postings per person
/ personality to a maximum of five (5) postings a day? It's not that I
can't stand the heat, but I'm getting kind of tired of the spam in the
kitchen...

When it comes to voting I certainly hope that the so-called watchdogs will
review the process in full, so all decisions will be highly transparent
and visible to the public and the affected. It could for example be a good
thing to start with the decision regarding Jeff Williams. What I would do
if I was one of these watchdogs is that I would create a website where I:
1. post the notes and protocol from the DNSO meeting where the decision on
Williams was made,
2. post my personal notes from the same meeting and
3. post a personal view of the decision, if it was made in a sound,
democratic tradition and so forth.

Just my two cents for what it's worth,

Mikael

_________________________________________________________________________

  ICQ:35638414                                mailto:mikael@pawlo.com 
                                              http://www.pawlo.com/