<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] Re: GA Rules Violation Reported
- To: GA <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [ga] Re: GA Rules Violation Reported
- From: jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2007 15:16:04 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
<HEAD>
<STYLE>body{font-family:
Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color:
#ffffff;color: black;}</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3157" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=compText>
<STYLE>body{font-family:
Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color:
#ffffff;color: black;}</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3157" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE>body{font-family:
Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color:
#ffffff;color: black;}</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3157" name=GENERATOR>
<P>Mr. Dierker and all,</P>
<P> Please also site an official web site in which you believe that these
sited</P>
<P>"Proposed rules" to which you are referring to is located. The
web site <A href="http://www.geolang.com/draftGAListRules5.htm";
target=_blank><SPAN id=lw_1188756905_2 style="BACKGROUND: none transparent
scroll repeat 0% 0%"><FONT
color=#003399>http://www.geolang.com/draftGAListRules5.htm</FONT></SPAN></A></P>
<P>is not to my knowledge, an official ICANN or GNSO web site. Ergo, in
compliance</P>
<P>with setteled law, re: "Lorain", such notification is not legal notification
of anything</P>
<P>official, legal, or even reasonable. So in accordance with Texas State
law,</P>
<P>US federal statute, case law, re: "Lorian", I am well within freedom of
speach</P>
<P>and expression guidelines, law, FCC regulation, First amendment
provisions,</P>
<P> and setteled < case > law, again, re: "Lorain".</P>
<P> </P>
<P> Again and secondly, the "proposed Rules" at the above mentioned
non-official</P>
<P>ICANN web site would need approval by the GNSO council, the ICANN bod
specifically,</P>
<P>and must concur with DOC/NTIA MOU agreement as well as policies and </P>
<P>practices of same. Currently a number of these "Proposed rules" do
not</P>
<P>meet those well documented criterion, are in direct conflict with FCC
ruling.</P>
<P> </P>
<P> In direct regards to what you requested, the "Proposed Rule" given at
the</P>
<P>before mentioned unofficial web site is as follows:</P>
<P>"The suggested posting limit per 24 hour cycle is to be 5. This amount
can be increased to 8 with the letters OT in the header and with strict
etiquette content adherence from message 6 to 8. If there is
consistent abuse within these limits the list monitor may impose sanctions
- a 24 hr cycle is the lists daily cycle. At times of high volume, on topic
discussion these posting limits may be waived at the discretion of the Chair
and the List Monitor. "</P>
<P> </P>
<P> Although I did not include the "OT" in one instance for the date
previously sited,</P>
<P>I also did not over post either. As the "OT" is supposedly to denote
"Off Topic"</P>
<P>and no official Topic has been difinitively defined, I did not feel, nor is
there</P>
<P>any official GNSO, ICANN guidiance provided that is difinitive in
respect to these</P>
<P>"Proposed Rules", that any of the "Proposed Rules" which remains
non-official, </P>
<P>applied accordingly.<BR><BR><BR></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff
2px solid">-----Original Message----- <BR>From: Hugh Dierker
<HDIERKER2204@xxxxxxxxx><BR>Sent: Sep 2, 2007 1:34 PM <BR>To: GA
<GA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx><BR>Subject: Re: [ga] Re: GA Rules Violation Reported
<BR><BR>
<DIV>Please specifically cite the Rules section you are relying on in this
instance.</DIV>
<DIV>Yes you will have to cite the rules specifically and not simply state that
you already did that.</DIV>
<DIV>Please note that the enlargement of the amount of posts from 5 to 8 has
some restrictions and is fully objectively reviewable.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It may also be helpful to let us know what system you used for
calculation. If you calculated to assure compliance with the spirit the rules,
it may be different than if you used your calculation to get around the
rules.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Eric</DIV>
<DIV>as Chair</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>For your convenience;</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://www.geolang.com/draftGAListRules5.htm"; target=_blank><SPAN
id=lw_1188756905_2 style="BACKGROUND: none transparent scroll repeat 0%
0%"><FONT
color=#003399>http://www.geolang.com/draftGAListRules5.htm</FONT></SPAN></A>)<BR></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR><B><I>jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">
<STYLE>body{font-family:
Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color:
#ffffff;color: black;}</STYLE>
<ZZZMETA content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3157" name="GENERATOR">
<STYLE>body{font-family:
Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color:
#ffffff;color: black;}</STYLE>
<ZZZMETA content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3157" name="GENERATOR">
<DIV>Danny and all,</DIV>
<DIV> I had some other remaining previous days in which I had not
posted</DIV>
<DIV>the proposed limit of 7, starting 08/23/07 thru 08/30/07. So in
accordance</DIV>
<DIV>with the proposed rules, I used some of those additional posts
remaining yesterday.</DIV>
<DIV>Hence, there is no violation of any proposed rule.<BR><BR><BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff
2px solid">-----Original Message----- <BR>From: Hugh Dierker
<HDIERKER2204@xxxxxxxxx><BR>Sent: Sep 2, 2007 10:52 AM <BR>To: Danny Younger
<DANNYYOUNGER@xxxxxxxxx>, GA <GA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx><BR>Cc: joe Babtista
<BAPTISTA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Secretariat
<GNSO.SECRETARIAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx><BR>Subject: [ga] Re: GA Rules Violation
Reported <BR><BR>
<DIV>Point well taken. If the monitor is so inclined to agree with your request
I will start quite simply by asking the Secretariat to act accordingly.
To be perfectly honest I have no idea what the proper response will be. The
chair notes repetitive over posting without any designation, and or
request to do so. It is also noted that many of the posts violate rules in
other regards over the past two weeks.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>This is serious and not done lightly.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Eric</DIV>
<DIV>as chair<BR><BR><B><I>Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx></I></B>
wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">jwkckid1 posted to the GA list on eight
occasions<BR>within a 24 hour period on September 1 in violation of<BR>the GA
rules. I ask that a decision be rendered and<BR>that enforcement of the rules
be attempted.<BR><BR>best
regards,<BR>Danny<BR><BR><BR><BR>____________________________________________________________________________________<BR>=======
<BR><BR>'Regards,<BR>Jeffrey A. Williams<BR>Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. -
(Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!)<BR>"Obedience of the law is the
greatest freedom" -<BR> Abraham Lincoln<BR><BR>"Credit should go
with the performance of duty and not with what is very<BR>often the accident of
glory" - Theodore Roosevelt<BR><BR>"If the probability be called P; the injury,
L; and the burden, B; liability<BR>depends upon whether B is less than L
multiplied by<BR>P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."<BR>United States v.
Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir.
1947]<BR>===============================================================<BR>Updated
1/26/04<BR>CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of<BR>Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.<BR>ABA member in good
standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</ZZZBODY></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|