[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ga-full] Re: [ga] GA Rules don't go far enough
I'm cross posting this to make sure other members of the community can
follow this insanity.
I and Walsh agree that for the GA@DNSO to get any works of substance done,
it is critical that we meet the chairs and NC's definition of real
person. Yes - the chair and alternate have avoided this issue like the
plague.
We were given fradulent election, the alternate has admitted to allowing a
fradulent poll be conducted - knowing full weel in advance of the poll
that it was fradulent, the polling process as the chair and alternate
expected, was abused - and the chair imposed a set of rules no one wanted,
the alternate is now booting people off the list because he does not
believe they exist - no proof either way - yet Harald is swinging the axe.
This is a joke.
Here Walsh and I have agreed on a fundamental process of organizing the
membership, yet we are being blocked.
This is most unfortunate. And just another continous fraud. Where the
hell is the Department of Commerce on this. This is all very unwholesome
and very unamerican.
Regards
Joe Baptista
On Tue, 15 Feb 2000, William X. Walsh wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> On 15-Feb-2000 Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> > There's also another reason to limit the check to the challenged cases.
> >
> > We will have to move, for a number of reasons, to a situation in which
> > "Membership" is a concept distinct from "Mailing-List-Subscriber", and
> > in which there will be *many* mailing lists, with specific focus.
> > At that point in time, it will seem reasonable to check the identity for
> > "Members" (the more 'stable' population, that will have the right of
> > vote, ....), and this may be done once and for good, while the 'mobile'
> > population (the people subscribing to a general-purpose mailing list)
> > will necessarily not be subject to systematic control (too expansive).
> >
>
> So then we give up the list as a useful place to get work done? I think the
> list should be composed of the members. The "general purpose" mailing list is
> the place of work for all intents and purposes. Non-members are always welcome
> to read the contents of the list, via an email digest or web based archive
> format, but not necessarily have the right to post until they have been
> verified.
>
> - --
> William X. Walsh <william@dso.net>
> DSo Networks http://dso.net/
> Fax: 877-860-5412 or +1-559-851-9192
> GPG/PGP Key at http://dso.net/wwalsh.gpg
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: DSo Networks
>
> iD8DBQE4qeAC8zLmV94Pz+IRAmDlAKCH/KXftyJlr3Y9nEf5kSuKgTHFdwCeKJOW
> Hq/ZBmMJdev/V894AI6z6MM=
> =4EeP
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html