[ga-full] DNSO.ORG has melted down?

["Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

This week has been most interesting. First the cracker-kiddies start capping
some of the largest pipes on the Internet (which scares the bejeezus out of
me), then I see a bunch of folks, that I have mucho respect for, leave this
[DNSO-GA] forum.

I have been watching this for some time. I too have been concerned with the
noise level. Currently, I peg the value-add content somewhere south of 1% of
list traffic. I can mostly lay this at the feet of one Joe Baptista.
Congratulations Joe, you've done PCCF proud.

However, I can make a case for comparative negligence with the operators of
DNSO.ORG, as well. In that case, Joe has made a strong point; A trust
relationship can not exist when with this many unfiltered and unverified
persons. Especially, when one of them has the malicious intent/capability
that Joe has demonstrated. In this environment, informal and  ad hoc
practices of the past will, demonstrably, not work. This can be laid at the
feet of the DNSO Names Council (whom adopted Roberts Rules, yet still could
not even spell them in the San Jose NC meeting [buying the book is
insufficient, one must also read it]).

Formal rules and process may be a burden, but participating in this sort of
activity, without them, may be a complete waste of time. I mentioned
something like this when I addressed the Names Council, in San Jose.
However, structure does NOT appear out of nowhere, it must be created. The
manner of creation is ALWAYS contentious. The failure to realize this, and
act accordingly, is the prime failure of the DNSO and the ICANN as well.

DNSO.ORG, and the ICANN, by association, is failing this political
competency litmus test.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Patrick
> Greenwell
> Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2000 8:43 AM
> To: William X. Walsh
> Cc: Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law; ga@dnso.org; Kent Crispin
> Subject: Re: [ga] Message from the Chair - List Rules
>
>
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2000, William X. Walsh wrote:
>
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> >
> > The only one annoyed, is you.
>
> Not really, I'm with Michael.