Properly organizing the GA should be the first priority - Re: [ga] Posting Rules - Call for a VOTE

[Derek Conant <dconant@dnsga.org>]

The problem with proposals concerning separate workgroup mailing lists is that it
is not clear to GA members that the other GA lists exist.  This problem exists
primarily because GA members are not properly organized and members lose interest
in following GA developments.  Some GA members may disagree with this.  However,
those GA members probably do not understand the first thing about organizing a
group and this may be why they appear unsuccessful at moving the group forward or
recognizing the problem.  So, it appears that they cannot understand the problem
facing the GA, refuse to properly address the problem nor able to fix it
themselves.

It is difficult sometimes to stay focused within a group that appears
disorganized and that has not made any real progress.  I have also expressed my
concern that the GA is being spread thin with the many GA mailing lists coupled
with poor management of those lists.

Communication to inform and update GA members should be improved.  I believe that
few people use the the DNSO Web site at http://dnso.org for updated information
after they have signed up for the GA mailing list.  I was not aware of the 5 post
per day limit or the other workgroup mailing lists until only a few days ago.

It appears that it is not worth the time and effort to suggest the creation of
new mailing lists (or anything else for that matter) within a group that is not
properly organized.  Properly organizing the GA should be the first priority of
interested parties if it can be understood, however, I have already tried to
suggest this to the GA and apparently to no avail.

In my opinion, there is not enough substance in GA discussions to warrant any
other or new GA mailing list at this time.

Derek Conant
DNSGA President and Chairman

"William X. Walsh" wrote:

> Hello Patrick,
>
> Sunday, June 17, 2001, 2:29:28 AM, Patrick Corliss wrote:
> > It should be obvious to any member with the slightest common sense that the
> > [ga-rules] mailing list was set up to discuss mailing list rules and
> > protocols.  Including time zones.  It was thought this would free up the
> > main [ga] list for substantive rather than procedural issues.
>
> Can it Patrick.  You already lost this debate. It was thought by you
> and Danny, no one else.
>
> > Could I ask members to indicate their preference for (a), (b) or (c)?
>
> No you cannot. Your little survey is out of order, irrelevant, and
> doesn't follow the guidelines for a vote of the GA.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> William X Walsh <william@userfriendly.com>
> Userfriendly.com Domains
> The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
> DNS Services from $1.65/mo

--
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