Re: [ga] Additional Mailing Lists?

[DPF <david@farrar.com>]

On Mon, 16 Apr 2001 19:06:41 +0200, you wrote:

>David Farrar wrote:
>>
>>The ideal situation to me it seems is that the Names Council delegates
>>to the GA Chair and Co-Chair authority to request the Secretariat to
>>set up new mailing lists.  It would need to be made clear that such
>>mailing lists are GA mailing lists only and not DNSO mailing lists or
>>working groups.
>>
>
>I think we went already through this. I proposed seaprate ML on subjects of 
>interest already several months ago.
>I don't think there's any problem in starting a new GA ML, IMHO there's no 
>need for NC involvement: they have more important things to do then 
>micromanage the GA.

Oh excellent.  I wasn't aware the GA had any authority to do anything
apart from exist but I agree it would be sensible if we can facilitate
our own mailing lists.

>The point is only that there is an administrative overhead in starting a 
>list: it cannot be done for each and every real or supposed need.
>I think it will be sensible that the (new) Chair assess the need (with a 
>straw poll if necessary.

Agreed.  

>Personally, I am in favour of a GA ML for:
>- DNSO Review, to continue discussion ongoing in the to-be-discontinued WG 
>Review;
>- alternate roots, to provide a specific forum for the subject (and possibly 
>to come up with a scope of the WG to be proposed to NC).

I would suggest a third.  The WIPO 2 report has some very significant
recommendations and I believe it would be useful to have a mailing
list to start discussing these earlier rather than later.  If the NC
set up a working group then any prior work done can flow into that.

DPF
--
david@farrar.com
ICQ 29964527
--
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