Re: [ga] Working Groups

[Abel Wisman <abel@able-towers.com>]

Assembly, 

On this theme a lot of post has passed us by, a vote is going on and yet we 
are discussing the rules under which we are allowed to for, such a 
"workgroup".

We are discussing the past ( in which it all went wrong) the future (where we 
repeat the past) and the present (where we wait for permission to do anything 
wrong)

Lst time i heard we were all consenting adults, members of a larger group (GA 
Maillist) who like to have our opinion heard in the hope that the forces in 
power will recon with those opinions while making decisions  or shady deals, 
whatever comes first and one not excluding the other.

With all respect to all given input on the WLS and on the WG, i (not being a 
chair but a human being running a business) can sense a great deal of 
consensus on at least two things here:

1. it is the distinct opinion of this assembly (all but one or two) that WLS 
is a bad idea (tm)

2. A workgroup would be a very handy place to further discuss the matters of 
"delete" (general term)

What stops us from reaching a real consensus ? hmmmm  rules imposed by those 
who say we can not reach that consensus.

Are we a kindergartenclass that needs to be told when to go to the bathroom ? 
(ok perhaps at times it looks like that but still....)

The mentioning by PDF that self erected WG's are grounds for counter WG's can 
in the exceptional case be true, but by stating such he delivers a power to a 
WG that no one on this list seeks or wants.

In a constituency the size of the GA with the input from so many different 
angles it is almost impossible for every one to be interested and or 
particiapting in all subjects, yet some are close to home or touch the 
interest.

Why would any formed WG, be it formal or informal, not be simply @approved@ 
by the GA (there is such a vote underway i believe) and present a "draft" to 
the GA say in a maximum of 3 instances, then the GA votes aye or nay and we 
move on.

To impose rules upon the intricate workings of the assembly from "above" is a 
restriction of our basic human rights to congregate and speak up.

We as the GA want to be heard? then we need to form opinions!
If the GA grows (which we all hope it will do i assume) then it will be 
harder and harder to "select" on the topics on which we can and want to form 
an opinion and be heard. If it comes close to the heart enough we can 
participate in a workgroup in that case.

The workgroup reachs a form of consensus (serious majority decision) and 
makes her proposal to the GA, i can see nothing wrong with that and do not 
understand (i don't want to) why that shoudl be "permitted"

In the end the "opinion" or "final draft advise" comes from the GA to 
<wherever it has to go> as a consensus opinion of the GA.
How the GA got there is of little importance to the higher level of decision 
makers, no matter what they say.

We do not need the NC or anyone to supply us with maillists, we can set our 
own up at any given moment in time, I am sure there are enough ISP's here to 
provide whatever we need, I for one would have no problem in giving the GA or 
any workgroup ample space on one of our servers, to do exactly what the GA 
wants to do.

Let's get real and drop all that "look important" stuff, IF the GA ever has a 
chance of being heard it needs consensus, how it reaches that consensus is 
therefore up to the GA and not to anybody else.

You have for you a chance to "change the rules and playingfield" act now, 
before this is only another "bitch"-list.

regards

abel 

-- 
Abel Wisman
office	+44-20 84 24 24 2 2
mobile +44-78 12 14 19 16

www.able-towers.com for all your hosting and co-location at affordable prices
www.url.org domainregistrations, there is no better
www.grid9.net bandwidth sales, for high-grade solutions
www.telesave.net for the best rates on long distance calls
--
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