<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] Re: $691,000 ALAC Budget
- To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [ga] Re: $691,000 ALAC Budget
- From: Patrick Vande Walle <patrick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 21:46:15 +0200
- Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=vande-walle.eu; s=secure; t=1155930352; bh=nEqTok4B+SqB8dDwkjRqMQPabt0=; h=Message-ID:Date: From:Reply-To:Organization:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject: References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=dh zW5zWJfWz7XlEtrgkaxL3/Emve55h48ad4rh4noq1JaBCRFsuJG5cZhTZhO9k9XBvTn AtdVtRHv/eIrgylJxGQJtdrePyzqubUOeHX0eb+X6awlM4Mm3n12xqLOtHr
- In-reply-to: <44E60B3B.3030005@cavebear.com>
- Organization: You are kidding, right ?
- References: <20060818122407.5301.qmail@web53310.mail.yahoo.com> <44E60B3B.3030005@cavebear.com>
- Reply-to: patrick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: Thunderbird/1.5.0.4 Mnenhy/0.7.4.0
Karl Auerbach said the following on 18/08/2006 20:47:
> They put up a website. Not the less the
> dud it remained.
"A" web site ? I can think of at least 5 web sites where ALAC is the
main subject, not counting personal blogs.
There are also many ALAC related mailing lists, with the net result
that information does not reach those who might need it, because they
are not subscribed to the list of the day.
It may be that ALAC is powerless. However, ALACers have their
responsibility in that process, too. Giving such a fragmented image is
certainly no manner to show there is consensus.
If ALAC cannot agree on one (or two) mailing list(s) and one web site,
how can it give the image of an united group with a meaningful voice ?
Patrick
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|