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

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

Kent,

You wrote:
>
>Also true, but I don't think very relevant.  Current plans call for
>there being 5000 members, a figure that can only be reached by some
>totally different process.  The entire current ga would be 5% of the 
total 
>membership.  The active members on the list would be like 2%.
>

IMHO, the statement you make is just the proof that the situation of the
 GA "as is" needs to be improved (in quantity and quality).


>
>Some interest, perhaps.  But that at-large membership is not going to 
>be just a 5000 member mailing list -- the situation in the GA doesn't 
>scale.

Exactly.
But this, again, is just proof that we need to change.

IMHO we need to define a "real" membership of the DNSO-GA, which has to 
go beyond the mailing list, because decisions, recommendations, 
elections, you name it, cannot be meanigfully managed in a single, large
 mailing list.

So, in summary, the GA is not just the GA-mailing list, and we need to 
discuss about a proposal for membership.

Last but not least, if I were ICANN I would pay a lot of attention to 
what is happening to the GA/DNSO, in order to avoid on the At-Large 
membership the mistakes of the GA/DNSO.

Regards
Roberto