RE: [ga] Comments from Pawlo

["William X. Walsh" <william@dso.net>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Your suggestions just lead to more endless wrangling and the ability of those
whose SOLE goal in being here is to be disruptive to continue to tie this group
up in notes.   With the exception of the spelling correction comment, I would
object to any of these changes.

On 18-Jan-2000 Mikael Pawlo wrote:
> 
> Comments to suggestion posted at:
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc03/msg00447.html
> 
>>Not indulging in personal attacks, insults or slander
> 
> Define this.
> 
>>Not using offensive language
> 
> Define this.
> 
>>If the GA Chair or Sergeant-at-arms asks for a limit to the nuber of
>>posts
> 
> Should be "number of posts".
> 
>>Certain persons appointed by the GA Chair (the Sergeants-At-Arms) have
>>the
>>task of monitoring the list for posts that violate these rules.
>>These are selected by the GA Chair for a given period of time, but may be
>>removed from the role by the GA Chair or at their own request at any
>>time.
>>Normally the appointment would be for 1 year.
> 
> Maybe the SAA should have a more free role from the GA Chair, hence maybe
> the SAA should be choosen by the list subscribers.
> 
>>A Sergeant-At-Arms may impose 2 sanctions against offenders:
> 
> I suggest there be only one (1) sanction, that is suspension. If the
> sanction is needed suspension is a fair punishment, monitoring
> (censorship) does not make sense.
> 
>>Both sanctions are imposed for a limited period of time (typically 2
>>weeks), and are announced on the mailing list.
> 
> Sanction time should be more clearly defined. I say 7 days for first-time
> offenders and 14 days if the same individual repeat an offense.
> 
>>The period is decided by the sergeant-at-arms.
> 
> No, the period is fixed as suggested above.
> 
>>Note that due to technical issues, monitoring one member's postings may
>>cause monitoring to be applied to other members' posts.
> 
> Obviously this is not acceptable - this just another reason to strike the
> sanction as such.
> 
>>The action of the sergeant-at-arms may be appealed to the GA Chair.
> 
> No. Three SAAs are choosen in majority election by the list members. If
> the member who's been punished by a SAA wants to appeal, he'll make his
> appeal to the SAA appeal board. The SAA appeal board will consist of the
> two SAAs who did not make the decision and of one randomly choosen list
> member. The SAA appeal board will make a final decision on the matter.
> 
> I hope you find my views useful.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Mikael
> 
> _________________________________________________________________________
> 
>   ICQ:35638414                                mailto:mikael@pawlo.com 
>                                               http://www.pawlo.com/

- --
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

iD8DBQE4hPno8zLmV94Pz+IRAr1RAKDs+88GkvnPQ5aZ4yDhsmknY1XDrQCg4AIS
edsCGGaHllFpqcNrSDhNOLU=
=9MjE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----