Re: [ga] MOTION - Moving Discussion Off the GA List

["William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>]

Hello Patrick,

Thursday, July 12, 2001, 11:18:24 PM, Patrick Corliss wrote:

> The folowing motion has been proposed, seconded and amended.

> (1)    The GA list should be reserved for substantive issues relating to DNS
> policy.  All debate relating to rules, lists, protocols, procedures, etc.
> should be debated on GA-RULES.  However, subscribers to GA-RULES may
> refer issues to the full GA for a determinative ballot or follow such other
> prescribed procedures that have been adopted by the General Assembly.

This puts control over this substantive area of discussion into the
hands of a very small subset, and effectively means that if you bring
up procedural matters at all on the main list, which is the embodiment
of the General Assembly, that you will be sanctioned unless you first
got the members of the very small subset to agree with you.

This is not appropriate at all, and it has not been debated or
discussed in NEAR what should be considered a minimum amount before
being taken seriously as a consensus motion.

This is Patrick's attempt to start the first stepping stone to his
agenda of segregating all important subjects off the main list into
his little "mandatory idea constituencies."

He choose this one to set the precedent with, since he assumes
(incorrectly in my opinion) that this is the subject enough people are
fed up with seeing, and can use that to the advantage of his agenda.

-- 
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