[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ga] Comments from Pawlo

Alex and all DNSO'ers,

  Your comments nicely show one aspect of why the proposed "Rules"
are divisively motivated.  Thank you for pointing this out for everyone!  :)

Alex Kamantauskas wrote:

> >> The way to combat the noisemakers is to give them the amount of
> >> attention they deserve, which is none.  Proposing rules to deal with
> >> them is no better than responding to them - it merely feeds their egos.
> >
> > When the rules are in place, the noisemakers will be silenced.  And then
> > there will be no noise relating to them.
> >
>  Which leads into the reason, and the only reason, that I want an
>  "unfiltered" list.  I'm not exactly sure what constitutes a "noisemaker"
>  If a "noisemaker" is someone like Jeff Williams or Joe Baptista, then of
>  course I don't mind them being filtered.  However, what if the
>  "noisemaker" is someone who is presenting a position contrary to the list
>  majority, and is beginning to gain a consensus?  I'm not saying that this
>  will ever happen, but if that person is deemed a "noisemaker" by the
>  powers that be and is removed from the list, at least their record will
>  remain on the unfiltered list.  Yes, along with the noise that will
>  surely flood the unfiltered list, but there are many deft enough with
>  their own private filters that the unfiltered list can be just as useful
>  as the filtered list (and perhaps even *more* useful).
>  That is really my only concern.
> --
> Alex Kamantauskas
> alexk@tugger.net

James Touton
Legal and Policy Advisory Council,
INEGRoup (Stakeholder)

NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at