2nd try: Re: [wg-c] Mailing lists

["Mark C. Langston" <skritch@home.com>]

For some reason, the first submission of this never appeared on
the list.  Sendmail timestamped the handoff almost 4 hours ago.

Perhaps this one will avoid the original's fate.

On 14 July 1999, Javier <javier@aui.es> wrote:

>Mark,
>
>>  Yesterday afternoon, I request to be added to wg-c-1, and a few
>>hours later, I request that I be added to wg-c-2.
>>  Last night, you add me only to wg-c-2, with no explanation.
>
>You might have noticed that in here there are people who have volunteered
>to do some work, such as handling the mailing lists. The fact that I have
>volunteered to do so does not mean that I must be ready to jump to satisfy
>your desires within a second's notice. I sleep sometimes, I go to the
>bathroom, eat.. and all those things that people do, I actually have a
>life, part of which is putting up with idiots trying to have me jump at
>their speed in their own time zone. Some of us live in a different time
>zones and also have jobs to attend to that are much important than you are.


I'm sorry, Javier.  I assumed that since you read one email, which 
was clearly a followup to an email sent only hours earlier, that you
would have read them both, and complied with them both.  You seem to
have read mail from before (wg-c-1 traffic) I sent the request, and
after (my wg-c-2 subscription request).  Seeing you take action
on one, I inferred that you had, for whatever reason, neglected to
take action on the other.

...and I note that you neglect to address my other points in that
same submission from which you've quoted above.  Shall I interpret
your silence as consensus?

Really, Javier.  Sullying yourself by lowering your standards to the 
level of the unwashed masses.  It must pain you greatly to have to
deal with people who haven't been part of your back-room policy
groups for years.  If only you could make all those people you claim
to represent go away so you could just do what you think needs to be
done.  Things would be so much simpler then, wouldn't they?

Perhaps your workload is too much?  You do seem a bit stressed, and
are even now resorting to personal attacks in the GA list.  You 
barely managed to veil them in this message.  Isn't a chair supposed
to be impartial?  Maybe you should step down, step back, and take
a sabbatical.  

>
>>It troubles me further that you also control 
>>the subscription processes surrounding this WG, which you've broken into
>>4 seperate lists.
>
>I assure that it troubles me more, having to put up with people who insult
>me and then mandate me to put them in the mailing lists, to which I comply,
>because part of the process is, again, putting up with them.

That's a shame, Javier.  I feel so bad for you.  Anytime it gets to
be too much, just let us know, and we'll let you walk away from chairing
the group.  After all, you didn't choose to be here, the pDNC put
you here.  I'm sure we can manage to elect someone to fill the vacancy.

Now, please, do try to conduct yourself in a chairly manner.  We
idiots can more than cover for you.  We'd hate to let the world see
our unelected chair behaving in such an untowards manner.  After all,
you represent the pDNC here, do you not?

-- 
Mark C. Langston	     			Let your voice be heard:
mark@bitshift.org				     http://www.idno.org
Systems Admin					    http://www.icann.org
San Jose, CA					     http://www.dnso.org