RE: Re[2]: [ga] Reform in the GA?

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

You know, this little squabble has already torn down one list, maybe two,
and it has taken a good-sized chunk of this one, to the point that BOTH
co-chairs spoke up against it, just last month. Please, don't reply to the
cross-poster.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joop Teernstra [mailto:terastra@terabytz.co.nz]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:46 AM
> To: ga@dnso.org
> Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Reform in the GA?
> 
> 
> At 23:53 6/02/01 -0800, William X. Walsh wrote:
> 
> >
> >I doubt Joop Teernstra (who opposed the rules that eliminated the
> >Baptista problem) was taking credit for that.
> >
> 
> Mr Walsh in his zeal for carrying his vendetta anew to this 
> list, has some
> problem with the truth here.
> I never opposed the list rules. I suggested an improvement.
> 
> What I said was this:
> 
> quote********
> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 11:41:42 +1300
> To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <Harald@Alvestrand.no>, ga@dnso.org
> From: Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>
> Subject: Re: [ga] Proposal for mailing list policy
> In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20000112095241.02755980@dokka.maxware.no>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> Sender: owner-ga@dnso.org
> Precedence: bulk
> X-Envelope-To: terastra@terabytz.co.nz
> X-UIDL: 935ae6084c048926de6567eb81599640
> 
> Harald,
> 
> There is a danger in having rules (especially filtering 
> rules) that are be
> implemented only at the discretion of the Chair or the 
> Sergeants at Arms.
> 
> Therefore a suggestion for a minor improvement:
> 
> Challenged identities, insults and slander.
> 
> In order to make sure that the SaA will actually act to 
> protect the list
> from these, there should be a provision such as:
> 
> "complaints about list-behaviour or challenges about a 
> poster's identity
> are directed to the Chair , who must instruct the SaA to take 
> appropriate
> action".
> 
> (What that action is, can then be seen from following the 
> ga-unfiltered
> list. It is clear that there should also be ways to sanction 
> a Chair who
> would allow filtering rules to be applied in a biased manner)
> 
> 
> 
> --Joop Teernstra LL.M.--  , bootstrap  of
> the Cyberspace Association,
> the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
> unquote**********
> 
> Also FYI,  Mr Walsh started this thread with the out of 
> context reference
> to my posting on the IDNO list that refers not to GA reform, 
> but to the
> fact that the GA has gradually come around to accept the need 
> for an IDNO
> constituency.
> 
> Just to set the record straight.
> 
> -Joop-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 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