Re: [ga] Message from the Chair

[Dnsipv6@aol.com]

Ellen and everybody else,

  I also have noticed that Joe Kelsey has been repeatedly insulting.
So have Harald and Roberto over the past several weeks.  Joe,
why are you repeatedly insulting?  Have you had a bad past
couple of weeks?  Did you loose your job?  Are you unhappy
with you current situation?  Have you been having to sleep
alone lately?

David "Dude" Jenson
INEGRoup-East Director

In a message dated 1/27/00 6:53:38 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
erony@marin.k12.ca.us writes:

<< I was going to give this issue a rest, but Joe Kelsey wrote:
 
 >Since you seem so enamored of chaotic discussion groups,
 
 That is an assertion that is completely off base. [I suppose if we had an
 SAA, I could ask him/her to remove you for making such an insulting
 comment.]
 
 I am just unenamored of turning the GA mailing list into a moderated list
 based on what some sergeant at arms deems is on topic or appropriate.  I
 have been on mailing lists for three years and learned how to tune out
 those whose contributions are meaningless drivel.I just don't want others
 to make that decision for me.
 
 >please point
 >out a single example of what you propose here that actually accomplishes
 >real work.
 
 Please point out what "real work" the GA is chartered to produce.  As far
 as I can tell, this list will catch those who do not participate in a
 constituency or a working group, and we have been told those places are
 where the real work occurs.
 
 >I can think of no example of a newsgroup or mailing list
 >which has managed to accomplish real meaningful work in the face of
 >chaotic and anarchic forces such as we have seen on this list.
 
 I am on about a half dozen lists.
 Either they are
 - very informative and intelligent, but have low traffic and no mandate to
 accomplish meaningful work;
 
 -completely private, informative and intelligent, have medium to high
 traffic and have no chaotic or anarchic forces' or
 
 -open to the public and draw a mix of informed participants and timebusters.
 
 I believe that most sites with large membership draw their share of
 noisemakers and disruptors.  You cam avoid that by setting up gateways:
 limited membership,  moderated overview and individual filters.  I have
 engaged in all three of these approaches on for various lists.  The most
 effective is the list with limited membership, but that is antithetical to
 the structure of the GA.  So what are you gonna do?  My preference is to
 let the individual user choose their own threshhold of noise, not to give
 that choice to an SAA. My preference is to bifurcate unacceptable conduct
 from unacceptable content.  Those whose messages rarely contribute to the
 discussion, whose references are to others are scatalogical or insulting,
 will find they are shunned from the discussion, becasue the wiser among us
 will filter and ignore them and stick to meaningful discussions.
  >>