Re: [ga] Proposal for mailing list policy

["!Dr. Joe Baptista" <baptista@pccf.net>]

I actually don't find walsh arrogant.  I am arrogant and quite an expert
in that area.  Walsh is more a pretender to arrogance.  His is more an
envy of anger.  I smell fear in him.  But it's unrelated to us - it's his
life he fears.  And he covers it up with a paint of arrogance - but a very
shallow display at best.

To be truly arrogant - one must be completely in love with oneself and
one's position - as i am.  Anger has no business in arrogance - but comedy
- now that's a walsh of a different colour.

Regards
Joe Baptista

On Wed, 12 Jan 2000, Jeff Williams wrote:

> William and all,
> 
> William X. Walsh wrote:
> 
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > I seperated my comments on your post about the list policy. The prior message
> > was about the posts regarding the GA and NC. This addresses the ontopic porton
> > about mail list policy.
> 
>   How interestingly arrogant of you William.  I am sure some find this relevant,
> but I am not sure if that is a majority.  Given that if a majority is not known,
> I wonder just how relevant this preamble to your comments here are
> relevant.
> 
>   But I digress further...  (See more below William's further comments)
> 
> >
> >
> > On 13-Jan-2000 Karl Auerbach wrote:
> > >> There exists an open list that can be subscribed to: ga-unfiltered@dnso.org.
> > >
> > > The official list of the GA must be totally uncensored.
> >
> > This is your opinion.  And an opinion that appears to be vastly a minority
> > opinion.  Thankfully in my opinion.
> 
>   What is your documented evidence of this statement at this juncture here
> William?   Can you produce that for us here?  If not, why not take a vote
> on this before making such a outlandish statement?  For instance, we [INEGRoup]
> have yet to officially respond to this proposal that Harald has presented.
> 
> >
> >
> > You equate list rules with censorship.  I disagree with that characterization.
> 
>   As is you right.  But this is YOUR opinion.  It certainly is not a FACT,
> now is it?
> 
> >
> > EVERY forum has rules for participation, and there are means for removal of
> > people who disrupt the forum.
> 
>   This is not correct, as you well know William.
> 
> >  This is true offline and online.  There is
> > simply no justification for calling that censorship.
> >
> > It is running a responsible forum.
> 
>   Responsible is fine.  A variation of Roberts Rules of Order for online
> participation such as Mark suggested may be how that should be determined.
> Blankett false statements are not or should not be.
> 
> >
> >
> > >> The existence of this list will make it possible to have independent
> > >> verification of what the filtering function does.
> > >
> > > No "independent verification" is possible unless the list is fully and
> > > completely archived.
> >
> > You, and anyone else who so chooses, including the poor misunderstood
> > gentlemen from INEG and PCCF, are free to do just that.
> 
>   Nice smear attempt of myself or Joe Baptista, but unfortunately not
> very convincing as is already evident.
> 
> >
> >
> > - --
> > William X. Walsh <william@dso.net>
> > DSo Networks  http://dso.net/
> > Fax: 877-860-5412 or +1-559-851-9192
> > GPG/PGP Key at http://dso.net/wwalsh.gpg
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux)
> > Comment: DSo Networks
> >
> > iD8DBQE4fT7F8zLmV94Pz+IRAs3TAJwKKqnnwTU2PB07kVjs+GuApsVxIACcCMPj
> > LUHHx6rVzvDPLO16WscowHw=
> > =i7jC
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> Regards,
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k 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:  972-447-1894
> Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
> 
>