[ga-rules] Making Yourself Understood

["Patrick Corliss" <patrick@quad.net.au>]

Hi Dassa

> |> I also think this topic ought to be discussed on GA-RULES.
>
> As you wish although I'm not sure it is appropriate here either.

Thank you for your comments.  I have suggested GA-RULES as this forum
relates to all of the internal issues relating to the GA.  These include
conducting elections, structure of mailing lists, conduct of members,
conflict of interest, list rules and protocols and netiqwuette generally.

After consulting with the Chair, I arranged for the change of name from
GA-INT as it was felt that members were pricipally interested in the "rules"
and would find the name more convenient.  It was not meant to restrict the
debate to "rules" alone.

My point was simply that we need to make some effort to ensure that we are
understood.  One member, who name I won't mention, forwards postings that
are no cryptic that nobody on the list, including yourself I'd imagine, can
understand them.   This is to be deplored.

As well, there are many members who may be technically proficient but whose
native language is not English.  Expressions like "red herring" can be quite
troublesome.  This is known as "cultural literacy" and I'm sure you noticed
that as a problem on the OpenSRS Discussion list.

Even though most of us have certain expertise, at least some of us are
specialists in law, IT, accounting, etc.  Even within IT there are various
disciplines.  I spent two years teaching at UTS in the School of Computing
Sciences and my discxipline, Information Systems, did not provide me with
much understanding of the issues discussed on Nanog or Namedroppers.

An example from Namedroppers where the term "baliwick" was discussed:

> > Where does this bailiwick notion come from?   I see no reference to
> > that anywhere in the DNS specs, etc.   This looks to be an invention
> > that you believe rationalises your approach to glue, and your private
> > theories as to how people should name their nameservers.
>
> It isn't written down in 1034/5.  However, it is a necessary concept
> to avoid cache poisoning.  A servers' bailiwick(s) include all the
> data that that server is listed as a nameserver for (ie, which the
> cache considering bailiwicks might ask for the data).  That includes
> all zones delegated to that server and all their subzones.

You wrote:

> I contend it is up to those who do not understand the technical, political
> or social references to research and form their own conclusions on such
> matters.

Sure.  You can contend that.  I'd like to read the hundreds of postings that
I see each day without treating each one as a research task.  If the author
expects that level of commitment from all readers, I'd say he or she will be
disappointed.  Most subscribers don't read half of what's posted anyway.

Best regards
Patrick Corliss














--
This message was passed to you via the ga-rules@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-rules" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html