Re: [ga-rules] Proposal for a Buddy Sytem for new members

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

Derryl (AKA Dessa) and all,

Dassa wrote:

> |> -----Original Message-----
> |> From: owner-ga-rules@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga-rules@dnso.org]On Behalf
> |> Of Jeff Williams
> |> Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2001 12:50 AM
> |> To: dassa@dhs.org
> |> Cc: [ga-rules]
> |> Subject: Re: [ga-rules] Proposal for a Buddy Sytem for new members
> |>
> |>
> |> Darryl and all,
> |>
> |>   I agree with Darryl (Aka Dessa) that a "Buddy system" for new members
> |> is not likely to work on the DNSO GA or within the DNSO on any sub-list
> |> for that matter.  But I disagree with the reasons the Darryl
> |> gives to support
> |> his conclusion.
> |>
> |>   The GA is a "General Assembly", as such it is open, or should
> |> be open to any and all interested Parties as is outlined in the White
> Paper and MoU
> |> for interaction, debate, and discourse on the various forums
> |> that the DNSO GA no has.  Given that, it seems reasonable and logical
> that some new
> |> participants or interested parties, may or may not have a specific or
> |> definable reasonable level of understanding.  In addition part of what
> |> the DNSO GA is all about in learning from each other, not presupposing
> |> a particular level of competency in any single area of expertise.  To
> |> presuppose any level of competency in DNSO related issues would in
> effect be
> |> engaging in SELECTIVE CENSORSHIP.  That is fundamentally WRONG,
> |> and should not be encouraged at any level or by anyone....
>
> I agree with an informal mentoring system and that will always transpire in
> such an Assembly as we have here.  I disagee with a formal system that
> imposes obligations on only those who wish or have the time to participate.
> In an informal system, there is much more latitude than in a formal system.

  Agreed here to this extent.

>
> I have no wish to restrict anyone from joining the GA, however, I refute
> any claims that any member of the GA need to expend time in educating other
> members unless they wish to.

  Also agreed to this extent as well.

>
>
> Any process that makes the learning process formal for uneducated members
> imposes obligations on the existing educated members.  This is an
> additional obligation on members who are already contributing substantial
> time and expense in this process.  I for one can not afford to continue
> with donating time and effort to support ICANN on a never ending scale.

  Now this is a good point!  One that I can agree with to and extent.
That being that as the ICANN BoD in the name of the participants
and stakeholders, participating of not at this juncture and currently, have
an obligation to that degree to provide adequate base line education
in areas of specific interest with respect to Domain Name issues.
The problem with doing this is that it is VERY questionable that
the ICANN BoD or staff can or has the expertise to provide
such education assistance.  Catch 22!

>
>
> Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.

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-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