Re: [ifwp] Re: Monterrey Report

[Jay Fenello <Jay@Iperdome.com>]

It's hard to focus on DNSO issues while the
rules under which ICANN will operate are still 
undecided.  This may be the cause of the light 
traffic on the discuss@dnso.org list.

Jay.


At 09:48 AM 11/24/98 , Michael Sondow wrote:
>Joop Teernstra a écrit:
>> 
>> At 18:35 23/11/98 -0500, Michael Sondow wrote:
>> 
>> >(BTW, these lists have got me bamboozled. This is the first message I've
>> >gotten on any of them
>> >for quite a while, except for kent's messages about the meeting notes.
>> >Anyway, wouldn't it be better to post to the "participants" list? There,
>> >at least, there's some chance of catching a few people who were at the
>> >meeting. This "discuss" list hasn't kicked off at all, it seems to me.)
>> >
>> Michael and all,
>> 
>> I am surprised to hear you make such a proposal just after lauding the
>> openness of the DNSO.
>> Are you suggesting that the "participants" are not bothering to follow the
>> open list and congregate only on the closed "participants" list?
>
>
>You're reading into this more than was intended. The DNSO has created a
>number
>of different lists, not for secrecy or discrimination but in order to
>keep some
>order between the different tasks. This separation of chores was one of
>the things
>that made the Monterrey meeting work, and the lack of such definition is
>what
>has kept the IFWP from functioning as an effective organization.
>
>Anyway, as I say, the DNSO has created different lists for different
>tasks, but these tasks
>haven't all gotten rolling yet, and furthermore there aren't enough
>volunteers yet to
>administer the lists. It's possible that the DNSO has been a little too
>ambitious with all
>its lists, but better to err on the side of too much than too little.
>
>In any case, the accent in the DNSO is more on work than blah-blah. The
>only IFWP-
>style blah-blah list is the discuss list, and nothing much is happening
>on it because 
>people don't have a lot more time left for blah-blah. Just as well,
>IMHO.
>
>BTW, is it common practice for a person who's subscribed to two lists to
>take messages
>from one of them and re-post them to the other, like you did with my
>message to the DNSO
>list? I should have thought that was a breach of netiquette.
>
>__________________________________________________
>To receive the digest version instead, send a
>blank email to ifwp-digest@lists.interactivehq.org
>
>To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
>subscribe-IFWP@lists.interactivehq.org
>
>To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
>unsubscribe-ifwp@lists.interactivehq.org
>
>Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email andy@interactivehq.org.
>___END____________________________________________
>