Re: Re: [ga] Final draft of proposed mailing list rules

["Roberto Gaetano" <roberto.gaetano@voila.fr>]

Ellen,

You wrote:
>
>Mr. Gaetano:  Au contraire.  At the Names Council meeting on June 25, 
1999,
>the GA list was defined as the General Assembly of the DNSO.  See
>http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/19990625.NCsj-admin.html
>

Indeed.
But this decision has been overruled when the the GA has been redefined 
(for the purpose of the nomination process) with a different set of 
rules.

>
>Yet the Names Council *unamiously* accepted on June 25, 1999 that the 
GA
>existed and the mailing list (now ga@dnso.org but previously
>discuss@dnso.org) comprised the General Assembly.  So you need to take 
up
>your arguments with the Names Council, not me.  I am just restating the

>public record as I know it, although things are so convoluted that
>subsequent administrative meetings may have altered the decision noted
>above.  Have they?

See above.

In fact, the rationale for this change of attitude by the NC was that 
there are people who are participating to the DNSO but not subscribers 
to the list, and that have to be accounted for.

Regardless the current and/or past attitude of the NC about the best 
definition to "bootstrap" the GA process, I believe that it is not wise 
from our part not to have a strategy in terms of the definition of the 
"membership" of the GA.
In the future, the GA-list will continue to be what it has been up to 
now, i.e. a discussion list, but if ever any substantial decision will 
be made by the GA, it will be done via a "membership" mechanism that 
will not correspond 100% with the "list subscription" mechanism.

> <I snipped the question on terminology - it may be of lesser priority>

>
>
>This discussion should focus solely on the RIGHTS TO POST not on 
whether or
>not the GA is a decision-making body.  I object to using this mailing 
list
>rules opinion poll to extend the discussion to a policy decision 
regarding
>the rights inherent in GA membership.

I am not sure to understand this.

Where should the (very important, IMHO) issues about the GA Membership 
be discussed if not on this list?

Regards
Roberto