William X. Walsh wrote:
Saturday, February 10, 2001, 12:40:44 PM, Sotiropoulos
wrote:
> Greg Burton wrote:
>> Joop, William, Dassa, Jeff, and anyone else:
>>
>> I resigned from IDNO because of this constant back and forth garbage.
Get
>> it out of here, please - there is no law that says you have to respond
on
>> this list, and I'm very offended that it's spilling over to the
GA..
> Ditto for me.
You will note that it was a post about the claims of reform in the GA
as a result of the IDNO that started the discussion in here again,
that had stagnated.
>> We have serious work to get done here, and it's getting drowned out
by the
>> garbage. Did it ever occur to ANY of you that every single "but
I have to
>> respond because X is saying Y" post you write makes it that much
harder for
>> any of us to be taken seriously? You all can complain about not
being
>> listened to as much as you want, the sad reality is that people
don't
>> listen because you've conditioned them to believe that there is
nothing
>> relevent to listen to.
No one has made such a complaint, Greg. I've never complained
about
someone not listening, and have always encouraged people to use their
own selective judgement in deciding what threads to read, and what
individuals to filter out. I've even helped a couple of people
over
the phone in setting up filters so that they don't have to read my
messages.
> The object is clear: to
> divert attention and productive work from the @Large Membership.
Please, these conspiracy theories are getting to be a bit much, and,
more so than the IDNO threads, contribute to the arguments about lack
of legitimacy.
> What strikes me
> as odd here, is that the question of involvement in DNSO matters
is so preeminent,
> at a time when the need for work in the @Large is so crucial.
Please share, what is so crucial in the @Large, that couldn't be
accomplished at the same time as things in the DNSO? Why this
fascination with doing one task at a time?
>> Try to focus on substance related to the GA, please - IDNO garbage
by
>> definition isn't it.
It most certain IS GA business, especially when a DNSO working group
is addressing the issue of an individual's constituency, and those
who
are operating under what is a fictional mandate are trying to get an
organization that is flawed at its even most basic levels (much more
so than the DNSO itself really) recognized as that constituency.
This
person claims to be representing the IDNO in this forum, but lacks
even the most flimsy mandate to do that, except that he created it,
so
he makes the decisions.
If you don't like a thread, your mail client provides you the means
not to read it. If you don't like a poster, the same applies.
I receive well over 1000 messages a day, from numerous mailing lists
I
am on. I do not read but a very small percentage of them, exercising
my selective judgement to read only those messages that are in threads
which are of great interest to me, are by people of whom I have
developed a great respect for, or some other reason that grabs me at
the moment and inclines me to read it.
If I read even 1/5 of those messages, it would take far too much of
time. My mail client provides the tools to help me do this.
I'm sure yours does also, and I would encourage you to learn to use
them.
--
Best regards,
William
mailto:william@userfriendly.com
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
Regards,