Re: Re: Re: Re: [ga] Proposal for mailing list policy

["Roberto Gaetano" <roberto.gaetano@voila.fr>]

Joe Baptista wrote:

>
>On Sun, 16 Jan 2000, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
>
>> This has already been clarified, so I don't need to go over it, 
except 
>> to tell you that I bet that the technique of trying to paralyze the 
>> Canadian Government with a flood of faxes will be applied here, it's 

>> just a matter of time and to find a good excuse.
>
>Your either a liar - and you certainly don't know my business well 
enough
>to comment on it.  I will assume however that the language barrier 
caused
>you to be misinformed.
>
>Faxing the canadian government (in fact it was the Ontario) government 
was
>nothing more then a regular communication session.  back then I used
>government fax machines like email.  these days i just send the whole 
lot
>of them email.  Like my new "If you Don't Buy ICANN - Don't Buy
>IBM" campaign.  I have selected over 80,000 civil servants for
>that.  Email is much better then fax machines for those type of
>actions.  They take it more personally - as you all do, and they 
respond
>more appropriately.  it's like training seals with fish.
>
>> So, we can try the iper-liberal approach, but I am aware that, in 
case 
>> of a similar emergency, we must take a similar decision.
>> The iper-freedom for a few cannot be the denial of service to the 
>> majority. 
>
>that was not a denial of service attack.


Do you mind pointing out where in my message do you think I affirmed the
 contrary?


>  After asking the DNSO-LIst admin
>repreatedly why I was not posting to the list, and getting no reply, I
>decided to test using everybody else email address.  You can strick 
that
>one on an absent admin, or an admin who is a coward.  At the least, he
>failure to reply amounted to my test.
>
>I suggest you retract you accusation of denial of service attack, and I

>ask that you advise the Names Council to also retract that reference 
from
>the official record.  Because such accusations amount to liable and
>slander.
>
>> Anybody else willing to comment?
>
>It's your turn now - as a member of the NC and our chair, you've just 
made
>a faux paux.  Let's see if you know how to retract.
>

Just for the record, I am not a member of the NC (as far as I know).

About the need to retract, if you care re-reading my post, once the 
language barrier overcome ;>), you will see that I did not say that 
there has been (yet) denial of service, but that, if such a risk will 
arise on the GA, my attitude will be to not allow the denial of service,
 even if this will mean some limitation of the individual posting 
rights.

Regards
Roberto