[ga-rules] Appointing A Sublist Chair

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

On Wed, 18 Jul 2001 20:16:25 -0700, Erik Dierker wrote:

> All I ask Patrick is to follow existing legitimate rules until others are
> passed.  My suspension is illegitimate in that there are no rules calling
> for suspension unless there is a showing of lack of respect for the rules
> which I have have not shown and this fact was even cited in my suspension.
> There was proof positive my over posting was a mistake. and there is no
> provision for mistakenly over posting. {that is beside the fact that
according
> to the rules no new rules were passed that allow my suspension because
they
> did not follow the rules in adopting the rules}

Hi Erik

I would be happy to discuss specific issues such suspension processes with
a person who is suspended.  Personally I think that is quite approporiate
especially on the [ga-rules] mailing list.

There are three ways that this might be possible:

(1)    Reposting of Mail.  I am responding to your mail on the [ga-rules]
mailing list even though the post itself did not make it to the list.
Please note that postings to [ga-full] are always allowed (even when they
are cross-posted) so you should copy all mail to the [ga-full] list during
your suspension.

(2)    Allow an Exception.  The sublist Chair (if there was one) could ask
the List Monitors to allow posting rights on a particular list such as
[ga-rules].  This would allow the suspended person to argue their case.

(3)    Monitor the Posts.  There is a provision, within the rules, which
allows posts to be monitored.  Personally I don't favour this option as it
seems like a form of censorship.

Both the Chair and the Alternate Chair have called, on many occasions, for
persons to act as Chair to the so-called sublists.  Nobody has volunteered.

As the General Asssembly has informally endorsed the [ga-rules] mailing
list, I call upon subscribers to this list to nominate themselves or another
suitable candidate as the sublist Chair.  Personally I would prefer that
they
not be chosen from among the List Monitors as this might create concern in
the integrity of the decision-making processes.

My feeling is that Bill :Lovell and Joanna Lane might make suitable
candidates especially as they have both worked so hard to set up websites
and Best Practices guidelines.  However, they should both be aware that any
rules will need to be formally adopted by the main body of the General
Assembly.  Failure to take this step will create more conflict (as seen
above)

As a vote is being arranged for October, I suggest that we have three months
to finalise any revision to the rules for consideration by the General
Assembly.

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