RE: [ga] List Rules - Some Ideas

["Dominik Filipp" <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx>]

Well, I understand the existing limit might be an obstacle once we
decide to work on issues intensively.
 
Eric, Debbie, would it be a problem to increase the daily post limit or
to eliminate it altogether when we reach a consensus on this here?
 
Dominik


________________________________

From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Jeffrey A. Williams
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 1:54 PM
To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ga] List Rules - Some Ideas



Dominik and all,

I have no objections to your suggestions, only concerns as to with
extremely limited posting limits, how such can be achieved with any
reasonable sense of accuracy or completeness.  Unless or until that
limiting censorship factor is changed within the GA, most, if not all,
meaningful and comprehensive work is not feasable.  However as I have
long ago now said, I believe that this is what Debbie and Mr. Dierker
intended, which hamstrings the GA and as such, relegates it to near
obscurity or irrelevance. Good public discourse, like any other form of
person to person or person to public communication is never censored in
such a way, not even C-Span does such.  But the GA [ Eric and Debbie]
does!  >:(

Thankfully none of our mailing lists have such draconian nonsensical
Censorship provisions, nor did the FCC impose such on P2P traffic when
the RIAA's complaint regarding such was strongly and unanomously denied.
But the GA does! >:(  Frankly such censorship reminds me of "Extrodinary
Rendition", you may not know what that is Dominik, but Mr. Dierker
surely does.

So in summation and seemingly as usual, any of our members that engage
in Tasting activities, warehousing of domain Names, or Domain Name
speculation on a large scale, shall have their membership revoked until
they have renounced to ever engage in those activities via a signed and
notarized affidavit.  Same is true for Censorship [ other than self
censorship], infringing in any way of personal privacy, engaging in the
trafficing of child pornography on the Internet or elsewhere, engaging
in cybersquatting, typosquatting, phishing, IP address hijacking or
other defined forms of same, and/or any other forms of Internet scams.
Further, any or our members that fail to report such activities to a
proper legal authority shall also have their membership revoked or
temporary suspended pending further review.

I personally have a 0 ZERO tolorence policy for nonsense, and always
have. "Collective or selective censorship in any of it's ugly forms IS
nonsense!"

Chief Justice US Supreme court, Jon Jay 1791

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
My Phone: 214-244-4827




        -----Original Message----- 
        From: Dominik Filipp 
        Sent: Apr 1, 2008 2:15 AM 
        To: "Jeffrey A. Williams" , Danny Younger , Hugh Dierker ,
debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
        Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
        Subject: RE: [ga] List Rules - Some Ideas 
        
        
        Jeff and all,
         
        I understand your point here. Four votes for the motion gained
so far can hardly be considered a GA support. But the motion is based on
the public voice expressing its desire to eliminate AGP as demonstrated
in the last GNSO survey and not on a majority of GA votes; so the power
and the legitimacy of the motion is derived from the results of official
survey. For me the GA, in its current status, is still a mailing list
with all known limitations.
         
        However, it is a nice idea to get the GA community more
operable. Regardless of whether the results will be accepted by the
staff or not. Simply to find out whether the GA is a group of people not
only bringing interesting and/or valuable thoughts and ideas, but also a
body capable of acting accordingly.
         
        Our last attempt to build this up failed. Maybe we could give it
another chance and start with the domain tasting issue. I think,
however, this motion cannot be enforced by just establishing some
organizational rules but it should be a natural process of gradual
acceptation of the potential power of group of people with the same or
similar attitudes and goals. That is, a process accepted by the GA
members themselves. I have no idea whether such a support exists
currently, and I do not insist on it. I am all for it but cannot speak
for anyone else.
         
        I, therefore, would continue working on domain tasting here.
Everyone interested in it can join and work together. I have some ideas
how to improve the work; e.g. I would like to use a special notation in
subject clearly distinguishing issue-oriented contributions from other
posts; some examples
         
        GA_ISSUE_0001: DOMAIN TASTING | Elimination of AGP - Pros And
Cons Report
        GA_ISSUE_0001: DOMAIN TASTING | Voting - Vote on Draft Report
Ver. 1.1
        GA_ISSUE_0001: DOMAIN TASTING - Final Report Ver. 1.1
         
        or more generally
         
        GA_ISSUE_<code>: <ISSUE_TITLE> [| <Category> [|
<SubCategory>]... [- <Description>]]
         
        where pipe stands for category/subcategory delimiter and square
brackets are optional meta-terms (as usual).
         
        Obviously, every opened issue should be 'owned' by a leading
moderator who defines the subject titles.
         
        This could help try out the mechanism for the current ongoing
issue and we'll see how this might be working further. The details can
be discussed later or refined during real work on issues. I, personally,
would not like to be elaborating on this too much.
         
        Any ideas or objections?
         
        Dominik
         
        
        
________________________________

        From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Jeffrey A. Williams
        Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:11 AM
        To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Subject: Re: [ga] List Rules
        
        

        Mr. Dierker and all,

          My position on the questionably ligitimate "List Rules" is
well known and

        remains unchanged for the reasons I have already stated clearly
and

        emphatically.  BTW, Mr. Dierker I trimmed you redundant CC's in
accordance

        with the questionably ligitimate "List Rules".  Please practice
what

        you preach, if you would be so kind.

         

          It seems very clear that Dominik's motion is resoundingly
carried by

        the majority of the actively participating GA members.  However
as

        the GA does not have any formal voting process that it should
have

        there will always be a question as to weather or not Dominiks
motion

        is the will of the GA members.  Here inlies, and has always been
the

        GA's biggest detrament and partly why as Ross indicated, the GA
is

        unfortunately largely discounted if not ignored.  A sad
commentary indeed.
        
        
        

                -----Original Message----- 
                From: Hugh Dierker 
                Sent: Mar 31, 2008 11:17 AM 
                To: debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
                Subject: Re: [ga] List Rules 
                
                
                The list has run along very smoothly for several months.
The main reason is voluntary compliance with the rules. Once this
concept breaks down so does the list. We are not talking about
individual one time lapses. For constant repeat violations we must stand
strong and enforce the rules.
                 
                We are at a point for the first time in months, that the
list is coalescing into the form of producing a statement/motion. The
AGP issue seems to have come to a head and more formal resolution
procedures may be appropriate. I believe it is at a motion stage with 4
seconds. If the desire is to move forward in a constructive effective
matter, we should hear that from the members.
                 
                Eric
                
                Debbie Garside <debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

                        
                        Please note that the list rules state no more
than 5 postings within 24
                        hours.
                        
                        A couple of people on this list seem to be going
over the limit on a regular
                        basis.
                        
                        This is a final friendly warning. Anyone going
over the quota in future
                        will be suspended from the list for a minimum of
4 weeks according to our
                        list rules.
                        
                        There are a number of contentious issues
currently being discussed at the
                        moment and, as has already been voiced, I would
like to see input from a
                        variety of members rather than just the same
few.
                        
                        Best regards
                        
                        
                        Debbie Garside
                        List Monitor
                        
                        http://www.geolang.com
                        
                        
                        
                        
                        
                        


                Regards,

                Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k
members/stakeholders strong!)
                "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
                   Abraham Lincoln

                "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not
with what is
                very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

                "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the
burden, B;
                liability depends upon whether B is less than L
multiplied by
                P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
                United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir.
1947]
        
===============================================================
                Updated 1/26/04
                CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data
security IDNS.
                div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
                ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
                jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
                My Phone: 214-244-4827