[ga-sys] [Fwd: [ga] Rules for new lists -- needed or not?]

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

I would suggest that we need no rules on these sublists.

Eric

---

• To: "'babybows.com'" <webmaster@babybows.com>, ga@dnso.org
• Subject: RE: [ga] Rules for new lists -- needed or not?
• From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com>
• Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 07:32:57 -0400
• Sender: owner-ga-full@dnso.org

As I recall, there were no rules established for Working Group E, nor were
there really any problems with decorum.  That could probably be explained by
the fact that WG E did not involve a controversial topic, but rather one
that not a lot of people were interested in (Global Awareness and Outreach).
The experience of WG E is therefore not very useful in this discussion.

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: babybows.com [mailto:webmaster@babybows.com]
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2001 9:12 PM
To: ga@dnso.org
Subject: [ga] Rules for new lists -- needed or not?


Questions for those of you that participated in working groups A,B,C,D,E,
and Review...

Did your working groups have formal rules?  If not, were there many
instances of decorum problems?   Did you manage to get the work done without
recourse to an abuse resolution process?  We need to determine what rules,
if any, should govern these lists.  Perhaps past experience can guide us.

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

---