[ga-int] Mailing Lists - Rules & Protocols
As far as I know, there was a huge debate in early 2000 anout list rules and
protocols. Nobody wants to repeat it as it took forever and was very
In the end the compromise was two lists. One had rules and the other
didn't. Anyone can post to [ga-full] without restriction - even
non-members. The normal [ga] list has rules and courtesies etc. This
includes the possible loss of posting rights. Only one or two people are
affected and they are the most serious cases. Someone suspended from [ga]
therefore has full posting rights to [ga-full].
It's necessary to understand that anyone can subscribe to [ga-full] and get
the complete set of all mail including that from those people whose posting
rights have been suspended. Anyone can also check the archives to see the
difference between the normal and "full" lists.
The introduction of six sublists has created a bit of an administrative
inconvenience. At present all lists are being treated the same. There is
not a separate equivalent of the *full* list for each of the sublists. The
original concept was a makshift solution, it would be impossible to extend
it to the new sublists.
The Chair and I have repeatedly called for Chair for the sublists. Each
list can then have its own rules. Meanwhile nobody has voluteered.
Two lists might interest yoou, Bill. The [ga-int] which looks at the
Internal Processes (such as the rules) and [ga-ext] which in External
Relationships and constituencies etc.
What do you think?
----- Original Message -----
From: William S. Lovell <email@example.com>
To: ga@DNSO.org <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 1:38 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] Austerity measures AND ga-full
> So clue in a clueless newbie, here, huh? I'd not looked into the ga-full
> so when I
> saw this I assumed (not too unreasonably, I hope) that it was a means by
> could in one fell swoop subscribe to all of the ga lists. So I figured
> the big deal?
> -- one subscribes one at a time. But then I looked and find the ga-full
> as follows:
> "Those who do not accept the General Assembly list rules may subscribe to
> ga-full list"
> That is, those do not want to observe a minimum level of decorum, and so
> I must say even louder, "what's the big deal?" Toning down the rhetorical
> and burn
> is tough enough in a list that seeks to follow the rules; why should there
> (no doubt
> largely duplicative) list in which it's no holds barred? Clue me in, huh?
> Curmudgeon I may be, but in these lists I would propose another yardstick:
> "Would you say it out loud in church? Would you say it in court? Would you
> say it in front of your mother or your eight-year old child?"
> (Now that elections bit I see here in another email is quite another
> fish; that
> needs looked into.)
> Bill Lovell
> Gene Marsh wrote:
> > If this is true, is there ANYONE who will bring up the obvious, that
> > a veiled attempt to quiet voices that are unpopular with ICANN?
> > Gene...
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of Michael
> > > Froomkin
> > > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 8:39 PM
> > > To: babybows.com
> > > Cc: email@example.com
> > > Subject: Re: [ga] Austerity measures
> > >
> > >
> > > this is a joke, right? how much time does it take to run a mailing
> > >
> > > --
> > > Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
> > > A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | firstname.lastname@example.org
> > > U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
> > > +1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm
> > > -->It's hot here.<--
> > >
> > > On Thu, 10 May 2001, babybows.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > Please be advised that in yesterday's NC teleconference, concerns
> > > > funding and man-hours spent by the DNSO Secretariat in list
> > > > resulted in the NC recommendation to close the GA-full list.
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-int" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html