RE: WG-C RULES was Re: [wg-c] Short Position Paper

["A.M. Rutkowski" <amr@netmagic.com>]

Hi Roeland,

 >This is exactly why I support the 2-post rule.

Contemporary email client technology - even that available
for free - allows extremely easy filtering, channelling,
and summary display of messages.  There exists a good
self-indexing system on the website that allows all
messages to be seen by threads at a glance, or from
a time perspective at a glance - allowing rejection
of all messages and simply using that visualization
tool.

Whenever governmental legislative bodies have sought
to impose filtering or other kinds of artificial limits
on people, those limits have been characteristically
opposed.  Yet here - in a rule being devised for permanent
application of ongoing collaborative and policy making
processes - an artificial limitation is being considered.

The only thing that an artificial 2-post rule accomplishes
is to stifle open discussions.  It is ironic that this
would be considered for an Internet forum, when no other
known policy making or judicial forum in the world has
such a stricture.


--tony