Re: [ga] GA-REVIEW & Other Mailing Lists

["Patrick Corliss" <patrick@quad.net.au>]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 06:50:58 -0400, Joanna Lane wrote:
>
> William, the only game I'm willing to play with you is the killfile game.
> All the points you raised have already been answered fully on the ga-sys
> list for all to see. Reposting these comments from one list to another, in
> some sort of circular game, is not very clever. I do not know anybody who
> takes kindly to being played for a fool and deliberately wasting a
> person's time usually leads to rejection. Welcome to my killfile.

On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 06:57:45 -0400, Joanna Lane wrote:
>
> WHOIS is not relevant to ICANN? The Registrants Bill of Rights is not
> relevant to ICANN? The TUCOWS Privacy initiative is not relevant to ICANN?
> These are issues begging to be addressed aren't they?

Hi Joanna

Are you saying they can all go on GA-ICANN mailing list then ?

Or perhaps you should look more closely at the following post:
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02513.html
where you will find all sorts of interesting comments about mailing
lists and professional behaviour.  I made the following comment:

> My concern is simply that mailing lists should be operating effectively.

It was the need for clearly defined scope of each list that led me to
perform that analysis.  It seems that I was wasting my time also.

Your response, which I saw as unhelpful, was made at:
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02517.html

I then repeated my analysis more carefully for further input:
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02540.html

> Danny decided on his own initiative, to add another list GA-REVIEW for the
> purposes you have outlined.  Whilst I had no objection to the list, I saw
> there was a possible difficulty as it was not clear where the new
> boundaries were between the several lists.  It was a "scoping" problem.

And if that was not enough, I explained the whole thing again at:
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02569.html

with a description of a possible structure made at:
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02570.html

For me, at least, I can see that you have defended <ga-sys> and <ga-review>
but you have not addressed the more substantive issue of the purpose of the
lists and how they will interact.

How, for example, will these lists relate to the Organizing Committee?

Of course, you can continue not to discuss the higher-level issues but you
shouldn't then be surprised when people continue to post to the <ga> list.

Best regards
Patrick Corliss




--
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