[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ga] Comments from Pawlo
Alex and all DNSO'ers,
Your comments nicely show one aspect of why the proposed "Rules"
are divisively motivated. Thank you for pointing this out for everyone! :)
Alex Kamantauskas wrote:
> >> The way to combat the noisemakers is to give them the amount of
> >> attention they deserve, which is none. Proposing rules to deal with
> >> them is no better than responding to them - it merely feeds their egos.
> >
> > When the rules are in place, the noisemakers will be silenced. And then
> > there will be no noise relating to them.
> >
>
> Which leads into the reason, and the only reason, that I want an
> "unfiltered" list. I'm not exactly sure what constitutes a "noisemaker"
> If a "noisemaker" is someone like Jeff Williams or Joe Baptista, then of
> course I don't mind them being filtered. However, what if the
> "noisemaker" is someone who is presenting a position contrary to the list
> majority, and is beginning to gain a consensus? I'm not saying that this
> will ever happen, but if that person is deemed a "noisemaker" by the
> powers that be and is removed from the list, at least their record will
> remain on the unfiltered list. Yes, along with the noise that will
> surely flood the unfiltered list, but there are many deft enough with
> their own private filters that the unfiltered list can be just as useful
> as the filtered list (and perhaps even *more* useful).
>
> That is really my only concern.
>
> --
> Alex Kamantauskas
> alexk@tugger.net
James Touton
Legal and Policy Advisory Council,
INEGRoup (Stakeholder)
__________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html