Re: [ga] Complaint against the Members of this ML

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

Dear Chair,
I am afraid you have the response to your questions here.

On 15:30 05/05/01, babybows.com said:
>In response to the needs of the Assembly and the expressed wishes of its
>membership, the GA has established a number of new mailing lists to provide
>a focused forum for ongoing dialogue.  One such list, ga-review, was
>specifically created so that subsequent to the closure of the Review WG
>mailing list by the Names Council, our members would have the opportunity to
>continue to discuss these impending changes... so far, not one comment has
>been made on this list.   Do you require an invitation

IMHO, yes, The distinguished Member of this DNS/GA ML would
probably be happy with the civilian motivated invitations they miss.
Why would they want/need to go there?

They never asked  any list to be created by the NC. They asked
for a mechanism to acknowledge they had created one, the way
they wanted. Acknowledgement is obvsiouly a problem nowadays
on this list. :-)

I am afraid this ML story only shown them things were more
e-bureaucratic after they asks for freedom than when they do
not.

Jefsey



BTW if you desire some interesting inputs I would advise you
stay on alternative (your word) wg-review@yahoogroups.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