Re: [ga] Working Groups

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

Jeff and Assembly,

let me snip a few parts, thanks for agreeing in part.

On Monday 14 January 2002 9:11 am, Jeff Williams wrote:
> Abel and all assembly members,

>   None the less for the most part here I am in agreement with you.
> However there are a few caveats where problems arise in this
> creation of a delete WG.

let's tackle them

>You also
> say below that ISP's can provide the resources for such a WG
> with ML for this purpose.  Yes they can, but at a price in most
> instance unless you want to use the Yahoo method, 

I also said i would provide if no one else offers, servers plenty and a few 
webistes and maillists have yet to kill me, just shout what you want and i'll 
set it up. no doubt i will have an appropriate domain available.
(how does woes.org sound ? (jk))

>   The most important reason for making a formal request, as I
> several times have tried to articulate here and to Eric on the phone
> three times is that it would put the onus of responsibility on the
> NC and the secretariat to create such a forum (ML and WG).

Considering my age, and experience in life i see no reason to let someone 
else take responsibility for my actions and or opinions, certainly not if i 
thus also give way to possible interference with free speech and forming of 
opinions. In that case i rather host it and let someone here monitor it.

> If they ignore such a request and the opinion of the GA members
> from Patrick's Poll, than you would have it documented that
> the NC and the secretariat are being specifically disruptive to
> a open and transparent process to adequately deal with an issue
> in a reasonable manner.  And it would be clear that the NC
> does not act in a manner that meets that White Paper and the MoU
> and are not representative of the GA members or the predominance
> of participating stakeholders.

seeing how the setup is at the moment i think most of the aforementioned is 
some sort of a foregone conclusion.

as i said, i offered it already, see below

again: now is the time we have the resources, the people and the topics that 
justify our actions, what more do we need ?  written permission ?

let's count those votes and announce the workgroup, asking for a ML, if they 
do not provide, i do, as simple as that.

once the workgroup, now under serious time contraints, though mr. Gomes said 
end of January  in his mail to eric and the assmebly, has reached a consensus 
proposal for the GA, the WG can motivate that draft and send it to the GA for 
first appraisal, take suggestions, re-drafts and after either another 
appraisal or not, takes it to a vote on the GA.

simple enough one would say.

regards

abel wisman


> Abel Wisman wrote:

> > 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.

-- 
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