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

Re: [ga] Message from the Chair

On Tue, Jan 25, 2000 at 06:29:31PM +0100, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> I will not fight to death for the name (I am not very sensible to the 
> form), but my first assumption is that the shorter name should go to the
>  most used list.

Of course.  

> >And that raises the question of how we respond to messages if I am 
> reading
> >the unfiltered version and you are not.  All headers would have to read
> >ga-unfiltered@dnso.org, would they not?  Now there's a  reason to give 
> the
> >shorter name to the all-inclusive version.
> >
> I am assuming that whatever you specify, it goes to the "unfiltered", 
> and then to the "filtered" IIF it passes the filter, no matter what you 
> subscribe to.

From a technical point of view I don't think that is -- or should be --
the case.  If someone posts directly to the unfiltered list, it goes
directly to the unfiltered list.   People subscribe to the filtered 
list if they want to post to the filtered list -- everything posted to 
the filtered list is automatically forwarded to the unfiltered.  What 
you are describing is that everything posted to the unfiltered list 
gets forwarded to the filtered list and the filters applied -- that 
doesn't make much sense, from a technical point of view.

> >BTW, if you assert that mail sent to the announce list is considered to
>  be
> >published to the GA membership, then ga-announce@dnso.org = the GA
> >membership, does it not?
> >
> This sentence is, I believe, taken from the Bylaws,

The bylaws do not mention ga-announce.  As has been pointed out, the 
bylaws do not require that there be any email lists at all.

Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain