Re: WG for Delete was: Re: [ga] Poll for Verisign WLS proposal

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Eric and all assembly members,

Eric Dierker wrote:

> A few things here you may help with.
>
> Where are the rules requiring your proper and appropriate requests.

  Is this a question or a statement?  What is the purpose for either
statement or question such as this.  As you know that practice and
common courtesy has been to make such a request.  You know this.
We talked about this on the phone.  You agreed in that conversation
after some tantrum making on your part.

>
>
> I can read the best practices and GA rules but I find no rules for the
> GA setting up an internal working group.
>
> What is the logical problem with using an already existing list.

  The logical problem is obvious.  Again we chatted about this on the
phone as well.  Also, is this a question of a statement?  And again,
what is the purpose for rehashing this yet again in less than three
days?

>
>
> I find no suggestions even that indicate asking the Secretariat is
> appropriate.
>
> WXW absolutely does not want anything on any other forum within the GA.

  WXW is not relevant to what the GA members have done in the past
as part of practice with WG's.  Hence his single opinion is not that
important.

>
>
> Patrick insists we use the lists that are pre-established and call them a sub-list.

  I have not seen him "INsist" on this for a WG yet to be formed.  Can you
perhaps provide some URL archive resource that would show this
clearly?

>
>
> You insist on the nearly impossible - getting the secretariat and NC to act, and
> formal voting, and a gratuitous list for a WG.  (you might as well ask code writers
> to show up to work in tuxedos)

  Formal voting on what?  Please advise.  If the secretariat does not wish
to act, than you can conduct or create a Yahoo WG list for this purpose.
However I doubt that it will be recognized by the GA members in any real
sense.  If you are not willing ot do the work Eric, than step aside for those
of us that will.

>
>
> I do not see one of you having as a primary agenda, putting together a group
> that can correlate existing comments, provide relevant questions and come up
> with consensual and dissenting positions.

   Well you are grossly incorrect there.  You need to do more research.

>
>
> We know VRSN will be back and unilaterally act.

  They may indeed.  That is of course their decision.  However if they
know that there is a lack of interest and disagreement with WLS, which
thus far it seem that is.  They may reconsider doing so.  But there are
of course no guarantees.  That's life and business...

> Please drop your old agendas for a
> little bit and back a compromise on using an existing sublist which will cease to
> function
> as a sublist, feel free to cc the main list (although it will count toward your
> five).  Do not think
> of this as moving any discussion but more of a clearing house for Ideas.  By
> definition this will
> be an informal consensus.  The necessity of votes is up to participants.

  What agenda's are you referring to in this possible request for a WG
for Delete list/forum?

>
>
> Like I said before we don't need no stinking badges.  If we produce the best product
> that
> is license enough.  Fancy Pants WGs have been completely ignored before, the ALSC is
> completely sanctioned and they came up with absolute crapp.

  Yes but the ALSC did get several polls that shows that their report was
not inline with the participants or other stakeholders.  That is why such
a forum is helpful and useful.  If ignored the consequences will sooner
or later be felt and very well recognized.

>
>
> E
>
> Jeff Williams wrote:
>
> >
> >   I can't say one way or the other until a proper and appropriate
> > request is made to the secretariat and the DNSO NC as well
> > as the General assembly members.  However it would seem
> > reasonable that there should be an election within the yet
> > to be formed and approved WG for Delete, a chair for
> > such a  WG.
> >

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes 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:  972-244-3801 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