Re: [ga] jeff williams / this list.

[tc lewis <tcl@bunzy.net>]

well, i'm aware of the options of how it's technically possible.  my
question is more of: why is he doing it that way, instead of sending it to
the list like everyone else does?  like i said, sorting is much easier
with the proper headers (not that this list has "mailing-list:" anyway,
but hey, at least "sender:" is something).

it's definitely not just this message, but rather almost all (if not all)
that i see from him.  and it surely wasn't sent to me in particular -- i
would assume he sent it to everyone on the list, just not through the
actual list.  i'm curious as to the motivation behind such an activity.

-tcl.


On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Thomas Roessler wrote:

>
> That's easy.  Jeff didn't send the message you quoted to the list,
> but addressed it directly to you.  It's called Bcc. ;-)
>
> --
> Thomas Roessler                        http://log.does-not-exist.org/
>
>
>
> On 2001-07-19 08:13:09 -0400, tc lewis wrote:
> >Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 08:13:09 -0400 (EDT)
> >From: tc lewis <tcl@bunzy.net>
> >To: <ga@dnso.org>
> >Cc: <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
> >Subject: [ga] jeff williams / this list.
> >
> >
> >is there any reason why jeff williams' emails never have a "Sender:
> >owner-ga@dnso.org" line in the header like all the other ga@dnso.org
> >mails?  or any other distinguishing characteristics?  most everyone else's
> >mails have header lines like:
> >
> >Return-Path: <owner-ga@dnso.org>
> >
> >and:
> >
> >Received: from dnso.dnso.org (192.134.4.239)
> >  by magician.bunzy.net with SMTP; 19 Jul 2001 08:35:14 -0000
> >Received: (from majordomo@localhost)
> >        by dnso.dnso.org (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) id JAA22728;
> >        Thu, 19 Jul 2001 09:58:50 +0200 (MET DST)
> >
> >and:
> >
> >Sender: owner-ga@dnso.org
> >
> >the lack of relevant mailing-list headers makes these mails difficult to
> >properly sort.
> >
> >-tcl.
> >
> >
> >---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >Return-Path: <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
> >Delivered-To: tcl@magician.bunzy.net
> >Received: (qmail 9935 invoked by uid 531); 19 Jul 2001 09:02:29 -0000
> >Delivered-To: pmail-m/bunzy+net/m-tcl@bunzy.net
> >Received: (qmail 9930 invoked from network); 19 Jul 2001 09:02:29 -0000
> >Received: from johnson.mail.mindspring.net (207.69.200.177)
> >  by magician.bunzy.net with SMTP; 19 Jul 2001 09:02:29 -0000
> >Received: from ix.netcom.com ([207.93.225.128])
> >	by johnson.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id EAA17702;
> >	Thu, 19 Jul 2001 04:57:53 -0400 (EDT)
> >Message-ID: <3B56BF1B.88F73EAA@ix.netcom.com>
> >Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 04:06:04 -0700
> >From: Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
> >Organization: INEGroup Spokesman
> >X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (Win95; U; 16bit)
> >MIME-Version: 1.0
> >To: ga ml <ga@dnso.org>
> >Subject: Re: [ga] Call for Action - ALSC Questionnaire
> >References: <B77C0A0A.18C3%jo-uk@rcn.com>
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >
> >Joanna and all assembly members,
> >
> >  Although a poll on certain issues might be helpful, I believe that such a poll
> >
> >would require or should require the approval of the Assembly members
> >by vote before moving forward.  It would also likely better serve if such
> >a poll would be conducted by professional pollsters, such a vote.com
> >for instance.  As far as I know there are no professional pollsters
> >in our membership.  If there are please speak up!
> >
> >  In that professional pollsters cost money it would seem that the first
> >order of business would be for the DNSO GA membership start
> >getting it's financial house in order.
> >
> >  On the other hand, simple polls on specific questions could be conducted
> >without the need of professional pollsters assistance.  However I don't
> >believe that is what you are considering in this instance.
> >
> >
> >
> >Joanna Lane wrote:
> >
> >> on 7/19/01 2:37 AM, Patrick Corliss at patrick@quad.net.au wrote:
> >>
> >> > [ga] ALSC Discussion Paper #1
> >> > http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg03670.html
> >>
> >> Given that the GA is the only body that is both active and representative of
> >> the interests of individuals within the ICANN structure at this time, it
> >> seems that we have a particular responsibility to assist the ALSC by
> >> answering questions posed in their discussion paper.
> >>
> >> It seems also that some of these questions could be answered by a POLL,
> >> (which should be simple enough to run on one of several websites we now seem
> >> to have at our disposal), and that others only require plain statements of
> >> fact (such as confirming that the GA doesn't have teleconferences) but
> >> others would require detailed discussion to arrive at agreed-upon wording of
> >> a GA community statement, or even individual responses ( e.g. What (if any)
> >> specific consensus development processes should be recommended?).
> >>
> >> I've made a start on poll questions below, but am not sure how we should be
> >> tackling this. Suggestions?
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Joanna
> >>
> >> ALSC QUESTION 1. In order to gauge the level of participation and activity
> >> in ICANN's existing communities, as represented by their mailing lists, what
> >> are the basic statistics of these lists (e.g. number of participants,
> >> demographics, frequency of posting etc.)?
> >>
> >> GA POLL:
> >>
> >> 1a. Do you participate on the ga mailing lists?  Options: yes/no
> >> 1b. What is your citizenship? Comment box:
> >> 1c. What is your country of residence? Comment box
> >> 1d. How often do you post to the ga lists (including sub-lists)? Options:
> >> more than 5 per day, less than 5 per day, about 1 per day, about one per
> >> week, infrequently, never.
> >>
> >> ALSC QUESTION 2. Similarly, how many participants attend face-to-face
> >> meetings/teleconferences? How often are such meetings held?
> >>
> >> GA POLL:
> >>
> >> 2.1 Have you attended any face to face GA meetings? Options: yes/no
> >> 2.2. If so, which? Comment box
> >> 2.3 Have you attended any GA teleconferences? Options: yes/no
> >> 2.4 If so, which? Comment box
> >>
> >> Here are the rest of the questions. Some are more suitable for discussion
> >> than POLL. Suggestions for a Timeline to tackle this?
> >>
> >> 3: How are the results of the email discussions, teleconferences, and
> >> face-to-face meetings summarized, documented and forwarded for consideration
> >> by other ICANN participants? What working languages are used?
> >>
> >> 4. What conflict-of-interest provisions exist within each of the existing
> >> Supporting Organizations?
> >>
> >> 5. What mechanisms exist to demonstrate that due weight is given to input
> >> provided to each of the Supporting Organizations? What is the Supporting
> >> Organizations' operational definition of "consensus"? If consensus is/is not
> >> possible, are the points of agreement and disagreement, rationale, etc.
> >> summarized and documented? What/who determines if consensus has been
> >> reached?
> >>
> >> *    How much can be expected to be achieved from purely voluntary ICANN
> >> participation? What might the role of a professional secretariat/support
> >> staff for the Supporting Organizations play in facilitating participation
> >> and deliberation? How might such staff be funded?
> >> *    Who is staff accountable to (and who should staff be accountable to)?
> >> What is the nature of the relationship between ICANN staff and the existing
> >> Supporting Organizations? What protocol governs their interactions and
> >> priorities?
> >> *    Other than reading through relevant mailing list archives, what other
> >> resources exist that make understanding the issues being discussed in ICANN
> >> more accessible? In which languages are such materials produced?
> >> *    How should existing and potential constituencies be organized into
> >> Supporting Organizations or other entities such as interest groups,
> >> political parties, etc.
> >> *    How can individuals be encouraged to self-organize without ICANN's
> >> direct involvement?
> >> *    What would be each entity's role, authority, and funding source?
> >> *    What (if any) specific consensus development processes should be
> >> recommended?
> >> *    Should Directors selected by individual Internet users be a majority or
> >> minority of the Board members? How should Board seats be allocated? Should
> >> the current balance of Directors (i.e. 9 from the SOs and 9
> >> from At-Large) be kept?
> >> *    Should elections of Directors be direct or indirect (or a combination)?
> >> How should candidates be nominated? What voting procedures should be used?
> >> Who should have the ability to vote?
> >> *    If direct elections are recommended, should they be held among
> >> particular groupings of Internet users, or should they be geographic or
> >> issue-based (including issue or agenda-driven "parties")?
> >> *    Should some demonstration of commitment be required for participation
> >> in elections (such as requirements based on knowledge, participation, or
> >> money)?
> >> *    How can individual users be informed about ICANN? How can candidates
> >> for election and interest groups in any form communicate with ICANN's
> >> "At-Large members"? Relevant issues include privacy, language, Net access
> >> (use of Web vs. e-mail) and others.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Joanna
> >>
> >> --
> >> 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,
> >
> >--
> >Jeffrey A. Williams
> >Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
> >CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> >Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> >E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> >Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
> >Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >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
> >
> >
>
>

--
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