[ga] Re: Excess Posting Limits
Alternate Chair wrote: On Sat, 14 Jul 2001 18:59:34 -0600, Earl Heather wrote:But so far as I can see, there is no rule that precludes proxy posts. So I first suggest checking to see whether or not in fact I exceeded 5 posts. Secondly, it should indeed be handled by the list software -- if in fact that exceeded 5 on ga, it would automatically have been dumped, and I have fully supported that move. Thirdly, this procedure provides a mechanism for resolving a real problem raised by one member: a single post brings back 5 or 6 responses, to all of which the original poster is then precluded from responding publicly on the same list unless he/she waits until the next day, and then the next, etc., which on some issues is like not responding at all. This was a "stalking horse," to test the waters on such a rule. It is
a way
It is possible, but by no means guaranteed, that "official" posts from theI thought that that matter had been resolved weeks ago -- the Chair and Alternate Chair are not supposed to have limits on official business, and if that has not been written into the rules and instructions to monitors by now, it should be. Persons who wish to complain may do so through [ga-abuse] mailing list.And I say again, why is all this not on ga-rules? The Chair or Alternate Chair, it seems to me, have the authority to move it there. Indeed, at one point I was personally asked by the Alternate Chair to move a topic out of ga (where it had been started by someone other than me) and put it into ga-rules, which I did. Would the Alternate Chair like me to do that again? I would be pleased to oblige. Any attempt toOr to enforce, this present subject matter NOT being germane to any legitimate, general policy of the GA with respect to its charter pertaining to domain names, you and I should now both be subject to sanctions for posting off-topic emails on ga. (In case no one noticed, that process was the subject of what I posted.) And so it goes. Nothing substantive gets achieved.I am not "ignoring" the current rules, I am testing their bounds. We attorneys have been known to do things like that. When I buy a used car, I also kick the tires. For what it is worth, I thought William's further explanation (exceeding theSo that's an argument -- known as the reductio ad absurdum argument -- that presents another side (and its expression reinforces my notion that this should be taking place on ga-rules rather than ga). To generate such is why "stalking horses" such as my post are typically used. It is unfortunate that this is occurring on the ga list, however: the whole topic of posting has been such an endless source of fascination that discussions like this do indeed detract from legitimate ga business. Proxy posts would indeed have their down side -- we'd get this clique or that pouring comments through some single, selected "post-person" -- to which, of course, one equally proper response might be, "so what?" (Even as to the content of what I posted, repeated herein, I've seen no response from anyone, especially including the Alternate Chair, but instead the cudgels beating upon me come out, with no attention whatever to the issue raised. That's life on ga.) That's why we MUST afford legitimacy to at least the [ga-rules] sublist.If my insisting that sanctions be imposed on those who post to "wrong" lists does not support the use of sublists, I don't know what would! And I add that I understand all too well the environment in which the
GA
In a way, I am the sacrificial lamb, and all and sundry may now beat
upon
Bill Lovell
|