Re: VR, max 5 and voting (was:Re: [ga] Virtual reality)

[Bob Davis <bob.davis@netzero.net>]

Mikael and all DNSO'ers,

  Hello Mikael,

  I would agree with you desire to restrict the number of posts to this
or any lists if that restriction was one that was all inclusive.  To be
frank though, I must say that the claim that the DNSO List Admin.
made earlier was not helpful or constructive.  He/She made a claim
that was not factual.  There has been as you know, several members
of the DNSO General Assembly list that have been SELECTIVELY
CENSORED unjustifiably.  When that is corrected, than I think
your idea would be fair and just.

  I mention this again, as have others even one of the "Watchdogs"
Javier Rodrigez, because I don't believe the you or anyone of good
will would want this to bleed over into the ICANN membership
which is being formed.  Given the events in Seattle with the WTO,
and the violence that has erupted, it could happen again at the
next ICANN meeting.  That would be a terrible thing to happen.
But to disenfranchise long standing participants such as many of
our members, could lead to such a catastrophe.   I would hate
to see that occur, and I am sure that you, and I hope all of the
DNSO participants would as well.

  I thank you for your indulgence and your time.

Mikael Pawlo wrote:

> On Fri, 3 Dec 1999, Patrick Greenwell wrote:
> > > In my humble opinion, if the addresses are invalid for nomation and voting
> > > they should not be valid for subscription to the various mailing lists
> > > hosted by the DNSO. Freedom of speech issus might be considered, but I
> > > guess that kind of issues will only be relevant to real, existing people.
> > The danger in this is the complete lack of vetted, objective,
> > clearly-defined procedures to do so. Instead actions have been taken
> > on an ad-hoc and discriminatory basis without any possible recourse.
> (---)
>
> Fair enough. How about limiting the amount of postings per person
> / personality to a maximum of five (5) postings a day? It's not that I
> can't stand the heat, but I'm getting kind of tired of the spam in the
> kitchen...
>
> When it comes to voting I certainly hope that the so-called watchdogs will
> review the process in full, so all decisions will be highly transparent
> and visible to the public and the affected. It could for example be a good
> thing to start with the decision regarding Jeff Williams. What I would do
> if I was one of these watchdogs is that I would create a website where I:
> 1. post the notes and protocol from the DNSO meeting where the decision on
> Williams was made,
> 2. post my personal notes from the same meeting and
> 3. post a personal view of the decision, if it was made in a sound,
> democratic tradition and so forth.
>
> Just my two cents for what it's worth,
>
> Mikael
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
>
>   ICQ:35638414                                mailto:mikael@pawlo.com
>                                               http://www.pawlo.com/

Bob Davis...

__________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html