[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Re: [ga] PAB rules v. RROR
Kent Crispin wrote:
>On Tue, Jan 11, 2000 at 11:34:37AM +1300, Joop Teernstra wrote:
>> The PAB is not something like the GA.
>> Rules that may work for a grouping relatively united in its purpose
>> not work for an Assembly that is as diverse as a Parliament.
>The PAB had a significant amount of dissent and controversy. It did
>have the luxury of a membership of high professional caliber.
I agree with Joop.
While I have been a subscriber of the PAB list, I have never seen such
deep and systematic disruption activities like the ones that the GA-list
Either the GA will become (remain?) useless, and in that case any set of
rules will fit, or it will serve an useful purpose, and in that case
the attacks will be multiplied in number and depth, requiring a very
solid set of rules.
Anyway, the PAB rules are a very good starting point, IMHO.