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

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

Yes

NameCritic wrote:

> Hey in that case Dassa, since at the meeting in Stockholm, Members of the
> Names Council said they were not knowledgeable about alt roots enough to
> discuss them, should they be banned from the ga-roots List?
>
> Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Williams" <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
> To: "William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>
> Cc: "[ga-rules]" <ga-rules@dnso.org>; <dassa@dhs.org>
> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 7:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [ga-rules] Proposal for a Buddy Sytem for new members
>
> > WXW and all,
> >
> > William X. Walsh wrote:
> >
> > > Friday, June 22, 2001, 7:50:14 AM, Jeff Williams wrote:
> > > >   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.
> > >
> > > It is open.  The only things it is not open to are multiple
> > > subscriptions by the same person under multiple pseudonyms, and it is
> > > not open to those who cannot comport themselves in a civil fashion.
> >
> >   Hummmm?  I guess than Roberto should be banned for having several
> > E-Mail address's subscribed?
> >
> >   Can you defing or is there a Participant determined definition of
> > "Civil Fashion"?  If so, where might that definition be documented?
> > Where is the voting record of that decision on that definition?
> > You see, there are many acceptable definitions of what is "Civil"
> > or "Civil fashion" in this instance, that could apply....  What is the
> > DNSO GA's definition, is it well understood, is it documented,
> > is it a participant determined policy?
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > That said, a participant in this GA SHOULD be well grounded in
> > > DNS/domain name issues.  Otherwise, there is no purpose to their
> > > participation, and they really have nothing substantive to contribute.
> >
> >  I agree, but how is this determined?  Who, and under what criterion
> > is this determined?
> >
> >   I have noticed a number of participants that in my opinion don't
> > have a clue as to how the DNS works or was designed, nor understand
> > what is and "Issue" or is not.  Some of these Participants have been
> > participating for quite some time now.
> >
> >   Given this, are you now proposing that they can no longer participate,
> > or even suggesting such a thing?
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best regards,
> > > William X Walsh <william@userfriendly.com>
> > > Userfriendly.com Domains
> > > The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
> > > DNS Services from $1.65/mo
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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
> >
> > 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
> >
>
> --
> 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

--
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