Re: [ga] policy-making options

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

On 07:16 09/04/02, Kent Crispin said:
>On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:50:03PM -0700, William X Walsh wrote:
> > Monday, Monday, April 08, 2002, 9:25:44 PM, Kent Crispin wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:20:57AM +0200, Alexander Svensson wrote:
> > >>
> > >> open working group model
> > >>  - may result in too large groups
> > >>  - working group (and its proposals) may be dismissed as self-selected
> > >>  + little risk of excluding concerned groups or individuals
> >
> > > This is simply not true.  One of the most disturbing characteristics of
> > > open WGs is that the obnoxious participants drive off people who might
> > > otherwise participate.
> >
> > Workgroup C didn't have this problem, and if any subject was going to
> > do that, its the new gTLD subject.
>
>An occasional exception would not invalidate the general observation.
>
>And in any case, many would claime that WG-C most certainly did have
>that problem.  I certainly know several interested parties who didn't
>participate.

Just a minute. Please let not build scientific con/pro rules from one or 
two examples. As presented in Thomas' and Alexander's memos there are a lot 
of parameters involved which interact together. The interest of an analysis 
is to permit to understand the interactions and to reduce the parameter set.

I reviewed quickly these two mails. May I comment that I did not understand 
anything. This is not a négative comment: I am working on an analysis of a 
different part of the network systems trying to reduce a lot of concerns to 
their roots. So I tried to see if I could peruse the mail and understand 
it. Not yet. As I did not for Joanna's and William's Best Practices read 
the same way, but preceiously archived.

I would suggest that Thomas (?) puts his current ideas/findnings on a web 
site and that  Joanna/Williams work on it to see if there can be some 
cross-pollenization with their ideas. Then that we try to reduce all this 
and additions to some limited logical parameter tree. I do not know if it 
will work, but the GA is probably the most diversified Internet competent 
and motivated mailing list. The opportunity to define a "GA's Rules" to 
replace the "Roberts Rules" is unique and worth the try.

Thank you Thomas for keeping the momentum.
jfc





--
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