RE: Numbers - was [ga] icannatlarge has now signed up 544 members

["jeanette hofmann" <jeanette@medea.wz-berlin.de>]

   451 Temporary local problem - please try later
   451 Temporary local problem - please try later

Your original mail message follows:
--------------------------------------------------------

X-PM-Identity: <Default>
From: "jeanette hofmann" <jeanette@medea.wz-berlin.de>
To: Joanna Lane <jo-uk@rcn.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:22:14 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: RE: Numbers - was [ga] icannatlarge has now signed up 
544
members Reply-to: jeanette@medea.wz-berlin.de CC: ga@dnso.org
Message-ID: <3C8F5286.2961.AEDE4E@localhost> Priority: 
normal
References: 
<5.0.2.1.2.20020313191800.02b25190@pop3.paradise.net.nz>
In-reply-to: <DPEOJECBMOLLLJOFDNDPIEJECCAA.jo-
uk@rcn.com> X-mailer:
Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)

On 13 Mar 2002, at 3:02, Joanna Lane wrote:

Dear Joanna,

I think it is a very good idea to have a committee in charge a.s.a.p. 
that has the
backing of those who signed up as members. I think it is a bad 
idea to
rely on one web master or editor only. 

I would like to see appointed a handful of people, not more than
seven, committed and open-minded, who are able to ensure that
nobody can manipulate or abuse the process of building up support 
for an at large organization. As long as the list of subscribers is
growing fast, it seems not to be a good idea to work on a formal
charter that aims to establish a long term framework for an At large
organization. 

jeanette


> Look Joop,
> I object to these elections. Please pass this on to the "supervisory
> panel", whatever that is and wherever that is. The priority for this
> At Large cannot possibly be selecting a "Supervisory panel" or
> "editorial committee" for the website or whatever the label is, when
> it is blindingly obvious what is driving the site in the current
> climate, and it has nothing do with any function that can be
> performed by a committee. It's all about *Numbers*.
> 
> Right now, the website is functioning more or less as a public news
> service, (or ought to be) in that it seeks to confirm *numbers of
> public interested* in the At Large and more than anything else, to
> undertake outreach and *increase numbers* while performing a
> community service by offering a forum to self-organize into groups
> so that a *number of stakeholder groups* can be determined to exist.
> We don't need a committee to set that agenda - it is already known.
> News programs are not run by committee. A departmental head directs
> and manages other teams from the top down, delegating significant
> powers to those teams who uncover key stories from the bottom to the
> surface where the editor ensures they are aired.
> 
> The present climate is one of rapid change and as such, requires the
> GA, At Large and all Constituencies to think on their feet,
> something that is not possible if every decision has to go through a
> committee. The At large has tremendous advantage over the NC, the
> GA, the IDNO, in that it is *not* burdened by committees and
> structures.  Why replicate failure?
> 
> If anything is needed for the At Large website, it is *one* person -
> an Editor, with communication skills to oversee the technical
> function of webmaster, somebody with at least a credible amount of
> experience in public service media, to ensure effective
> communication levels and balanced coverage for minorities. That's
> all.
> 
> This Editor's core task is to attract *numbers*, and to encourage
> productive use of the forum to self-organize into like minded
> groups, whether that is domain name holders, non-domain name
> holders, regional assemblies, alternate root users, offshore casino
> owners anonymous, or whatever. At the moment, that is being hindered
> by a home page that does not point out that it is necessary to sign
> up to the forum separately in order to communicate or self-organize
> with other members, neither does it describe what the forum can
> offer. Members have no way of even knowing which members are in
> their region because no State/ County information is given, neither
> do they know whether any announcements of efforts to self organize
> will be announced through that list.
> 
> These are fundamental problems in communication with your public
> that can be addressed by an Editor that knows what they're doing.
> They are observations, not criticisms that I use to illustrate the
> point that you don't need an elaborate series of elections to
> achieve what is necessary - particularly when it aims to form a
> committee of amateurs who, with the best will in the world, do not
> have the experience between them to replace one good Editor with a
> track record.
> 
> 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
> 


------- End of forwarded message -------
--
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