[ga] Re: jeff williams / this list.

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

TC and all assembly members,

  Yes there is.  It is because I have been suspended under suspicious
circumstances.  See archives for further information...  As such I am
routing around the damage...

tc lewis wrote:

> is there any reason why jeff williams' emails never have a "Sender:
> owner-ga@dnso.org" line in the header like all the other ga@dnso.org
> mails?  or any other distinguishing characteristics?  most everyone else's
> mails have header lines like:
>
> Return-Path: <owner-ga@dnso.org>
>
> and:
>
> Received: from dnso.dnso.org (192.134.4.239)
>   by magician.bunzy.net with SMTP; 19 Jul 2001 08:35:14 -0000
> Received: (from majordomo@localhost)
>         by dnso.dnso.org (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) id JAA22728;
>         Thu, 19 Jul 2001 09:58:50 +0200 (MET DST)
>
> and:
>
> Sender: owner-ga@dnso.org
>
> the lack of relevant mailing-list headers makes these mails difficult to
> properly sort.
>
> -tcl.
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Return-Path: <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
> Delivered-To: tcl@magician.bunzy.net
> Received: (qmail 9935 invoked by uid 531); 19 Jul 2001 09:02:29 -0000
> Delivered-To: pmail-m/bunzy+net/m-tcl@bunzy.net
> Received: (qmail 9930 invoked from network); 19 Jul 2001 09:02:29 -0000
> Received: from johnson.mail.mindspring.net (207.69.200.177)
>   by magician.bunzy.net with SMTP; 19 Jul 2001 09:02:29 -0000
> Received: from ix.netcom.com ([207.93.225.128])
>         by johnson.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id EAA17702;
>         Thu, 19 Jul 2001 04:57:53 -0400 (EDT)
> Message-ID: <3B56BF1B.88F73EAA@ix.netcom.com>
> Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 04:06:04 -0700
> From: Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
> Organization: INEGroup Spokesman
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (Win95; U; 16bit)
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> To: ga ml <ga@dnso.org>
> Subject: Re: [ga] Call for Action - ALSC Questionnaire
> References: <B77C0A0A.18C3%jo-uk@rcn.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Joanna and all assembly members,
>
>   Although a poll on certain issues might be helpful, I believe that such a poll
>
> would require or should require the approval of the Assembly members
> by vote before moving forward.  It would also likely better serve if such
> a poll would be conducted by professional pollsters, such a vote.com
> for instance.  As far as I know there are no professional pollsters
> in our membership.  If there are please speak up!
>
>   In that professional pollsters cost money it would seem that the first
> order of business would be for the DNSO GA membership start
> getting it's financial house in order.
>
>   On the other hand, simple polls on specific questions could be conducted
> without the need of professional pollsters assistance.  However I don't
> believe that is what you are considering in this instance.
>
> Joanna Lane wrote:
>
> > on 7/19/01 2:37 AM, Patrick Corliss at patrick@quad.net.au wrote:
> >
> > > [ga] ALSC Discussion Paper #1
> > > http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg03670.html
> >
> > Given that the GA is the only body that is both active and representative of
> > the interests of individuals within the ICANN structure at this time, it
> > seems that we have a particular responsibility to assist the ALSC by
> > answering questions posed in their discussion paper.
> >
> > It seems also that some of these questions could be answered by a POLL,
> > (which should be simple enough to run on one of several websites we now seem
> > to have at our disposal), and that others only require plain statements of
> > fact (such as confirming that the GA doesn't have teleconferences) but
> > others would require detailed discussion to arrive at agreed-upon wording of
> > a GA community statement, or even individual responses ( e.g. What (if any)
> > specific consensus development processes should be recommended?).
> >
> > I've made a start on poll questions below, but am not sure how we should be
> > tackling this. Suggestions?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Joanna
> >
> > ALSC QUESTION 1. In order to gauge the level of participation and activity
> > in ICANN's existing communities, as represented by their mailing lists, what
> > are the basic statistics of these lists (e.g. number of participants,
> > demographics, frequency of posting etc.)?
> >
> > GA POLL:
> >
> > 1a. Do you participate on the ga mailing lists?  Options: yes/no
> > 1b. What is your citizenship? Comment box:
> > 1c. What is your country of residence? Comment box
> > 1d. How often do you post to the ga lists (including sub-lists)? Options:
> > more than 5 per day, less than 5 per day, about 1 per day, about one per
> > week, infrequently, never.
> >
> > ALSC QUESTION 2. Similarly, how many participants attend face-to-face
> > meetings/teleconferences? How often are such meetings held?
> >
> > GA POLL:
> >
> > 2.1 Have you attended any face to face GA meetings? Options: yes/no
> > 2.2. If so, which? Comment box
> > 2.3 Have you attended any GA teleconferences? Options: yes/no
> > 2.4 If so, which? Comment box
> >
> > Here are the rest of the questions. Some are more suitable for discussion
> > than POLL. Suggestions for a Timeline to tackle this?
> >
> > 3: How are the results of the email discussions, teleconferences, and
> > face-to-face meetings summarized, documented and forwarded for consideration
> > by other ICANN participants? What working languages are used?
> >
> > 4. What conflict-of-interest provisions exist within each of the existing
> > Supporting Organizations?
> >
> > 5. What mechanisms exist to demonstrate that due weight is given to input
> > provided to each of the Supporting Organizations? What is the Supporting
> > Organizations' operational definition of "consensus"? If consensus is/is not
> > possible, are the points of agreement and disagreement, rationale, etc.
> > summarized and documented? What/who determines if consensus has been
> > reached?
> >
> > *    How much can be expected to be achieved from purely voluntary ICANN
> > participation? What might the role of a professional secretariat/support
> > staff for the Supporting Organizations play in facilitating participation
> > and deliberation? How might such staff be funded?
> > *    Who is staff accountable to (and who should staff be accountable to)?
> > What is the nature of the relationship between ICANN staff and the existing
> > Supporting Organizations? What protocol governs their interactions and
> > priorities?
> > *    Other than reading through relevant mailing list archives, what other
> > resources exist that make understanding the issues being discussed in ICANN
> > more accessible? In which languages are such materials produced?
> > *    How should existing and potential constituencies be organized into
> > Supporting Organizations or other entities such as interest groups,
> > political parties, etc.
> > *    How can individuals be encouraged to self-organize without ICANN's
> > direct involvement?
> > *    What would be each entity's role, authority, and funding source?
> > *    What (if any) specific consensus development processes should be
> > recommended?
> > *    Should Directors selected by individual Internet users be a majority or
> > minority of the Board members? How should Board seats be allocated? Should
> > the current balance of Directors (i.e. 9 from the SOs and 9
> > from At-Large) be kept?
> > *    Should elections of Directors be direct or indirect (or a combination)?
> > How should candidates be nominated? What voting procedures should be used?
> > Who should have the ability to vote?
> > *    If direct elections are recommended, should they be held among
> > particular groupings of Internet users, or should they be geographic or
> > issue-based (including issue or agenda-driven "parties")?
> > *    Should some demonstration of commitment be required for participation
> > in elections (such as requirements based on knowledge, participation, or
> > money)?
> > *    How can individual users be informed about ICANN? How can candidates
> > for election and interest groups in any form communicate with ICANN's
> > "At-Large members"? Relevant issues include privacy, language, Net access
> > (use of Web vs. e-mail) and others.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Joanna
> >
> > --
> > 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
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
> CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
> Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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