Re: [ga] Future of sub-lists
On 18:25 09/01/02, Patrick Corliss said:
>William X. Walsh killed off the idea with a barrage of criticism. This was
>part of the reason I resigned as Alt Chair. The lists were very carefully
>set up to cover the main policy issues. Danny added [ga-review] in the vain
>hope that he could kick start that initiative.
Untrue. You killed the idea as you kill it today.
The reason while it failed is that they were very carefully set-up. What is
of interest is to have lists set-up and killed as the people wants them.
The entire mistake Danny and you made in supporting the WG-Review "jefsey's
proposition" was to kick our ass into your sub-lists. No one likes it.
The "jefsey's proposition" (cf. WG-Review archives and Joana Lane's site)
was that if people wants to discuss a topic one of them or a group of them
initiate a working site and list. The site to document position statements
and the list to discuss them until we can aggregate them into a consensus.
So anyone might pop-in/out a debate without loosing the thread and
competences may be self acknowledged.
A very different approach from your rigid, non site supported, rules
enforced, debate reported, ga list separated artificial sub-lists.
I do not say the "jefsey's proposition" would work. But I say you never
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html