Re: [ga] Exclusion of Jeff Williams for 2 weeks

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <Harald@Alvestrand.no>]

At 10:12 07.02.00 -0500, Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law wrote:
>I note that the archived copy of this message does not display the full
>headers.  As a result, it is not possible to form an independent opinion as
>to the likelihood of forgery should this be claimed.

This does not seem to be an issue in this case, since the person in 
question is defending his use of the terms criticized.
I formed an opinion about the possibility of forgery before speaking, of 
course; the best source of headers is copies of the message obtained before 
the case was raised.

>I note further that this suspension takes effect immediately, pending
>appeal, which is probably not a good rule in a world of potential forgery.

Or as immediate as we can make it.....
The alternative would be to have no recourse against a person who is 
willing to use an appeals process to stay a judgment against him while 
continuing to abuse the list.

>No information has yet reached me as to how one subscribes to the
>unfiltered version of the list.  If I happened to have missed this posting
>to the list, would someone kindly forward me the URL at which it is
>archived?  I am certain that the management would never impose filtering
>without first giving everyone a clear choice as to which feed they wished
>to receive.

My message to that effect seems to have gotten lost.
Send the following to majordomo@dnso.org:

    unsubscribe ga
    subscribe ga-full

that should do it.

>As a final note, I wonder how the level of decorum to be required on this
>filtered list will compare to the standards of, say, the Australian or
>Israeli parliaments?

I am more familiar with the British. At least they have some style in their 
invective.

                      Harald T. Alvestrand

--
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
Harald.Alvestrand@edb.maxware.no