Re: [ga-rules] Discussing the Meaning of "Consensus"

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

William,

I definately want to resolve this issue in our amended rules.  But let us be clear
here, Patrick is nudging with an eye toward efficiency, not mandating.  William, as a
man who spends hours every single day researching archives I have to tell you I wish
we had these lists from the very beginning.  Orgainization and process are our worst
problems right now because it blocks accomplishment, anything to further that should
be appreciated, as long as it does not inhibit free expressions within the rules.

With that said you know I harbor some of your same concerns.(I still want the sublists
to resolve to the GA-Full)
Also we must be very circumspect of anything that could fractionalize and lead to
capture by top down.

Sincerely,
Eric

"William X. Walsh" wrote:

> Hello Eric,
>
> Monday, June 25, 2001, 12:31:14 PM, Eric Dierker wrote:
>
> > Mr. Corliss is correct on this.  Unless and until we agree to change the list
> > rules, we should try to use the lists as superheaders.  I now like to think of
> > the GA list as one to go to when you get closer to an issue being ready for a
> > motion. However we should be careful to be inclusive and reply to a sender if we
> > think they are outside of the sublist.
>
> The GA list is the place for open discussion.  If people choose to
> join a specialized list and discuss issues there, that is their
> personal choice.  Mandating that, however, and thus making topics
> verboten on the main list, is something I won't accept, or comply
> with.
>
> --
> 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