Re: [ga] List Rules, moderator and chair

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

Just saw this as I was looking over some RAA-WG docs and noted it was sent via 
a clock that was broke. A guy named Walsh once told me, "you know you have an 
openminded engineer if he can take advice from a clock as to what time it is".
 
You are an antagonist. Your generally rational logic fails when you come to 
creation. (got you -- not Darwinian) But the creation of a process. By its' 
very nature the originating or founding process cannot be legitimate in the 
sense you use the word. How possibly could a creating process be created using 
that process? Everything must have a beginning. And the beginning of a process 
is perfectly legitimate if it is reached by a consensus of the founders. ie 
there was no democratic vote for the declaration of independence creating a 
democracy or constitutional process for the drafting of the constitution.
 
So your obsessed objection to our founding rules is misplaced. How can we have 
a "legitimate" vote until we have founded a process to have a vote? Until you 
or a protagonist motivate enough to overrule the founding rules they are 
legitimate.
Debbie is right, we have rules. And it appears that Ms. Garside and I will 
enforce them until replaced.
 
For clarification see Plato's Republic. or Roberts' rules of order
 
--- On Tue, 4/7/09, Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ga] List Rules, moderator and chair
To: hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: "Joe Baptista" <baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 
debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, domains@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 
gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "John Palmer" 
<jpalmer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Paul Lehto" <lehto.paul@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, April 7, 2009, 7:25 PM

Eric and all,

  I added another whom is as far as I know, not a list member
yet, but hopefully he can add some levity and wisdom to the
discourse.

  I am unsure if the reference as to antagonists and protagonists was
for anyone's particular interest, however I did take interest yet
remain unsure if I and either a antagonist or a protagonist.  I
believe I possess the best qualities of both and can at will, shift
from one to the other in the interest of encouraging broadening
thinking processes of all.  Call it a credit default discourse swap,
if you will, as I am sure a characterization of a Naked Short
Sell, would be too close to being overly familiar and that the
word "Naked" will soon be illegal to use on the Internet under
new criminal legislation being considered, and as I understand
it one of either the MPAA or RIAA members has a Copyright
and a TM filed on the use of that term ( Naked ), which doubtlessly
is related to some video book and written works which is under some
challenge of which I cannot elaborate on adequately as I and not
familiar enough with the case and it's progress or lack there of. >:)

  All this said, as originally I remain stalwart that the list rules
are not legitimate as they were not arrived at in a legitimate
manner originally as well as the list rules are far less to helpful
to outreach, which should be important as to transparency
and openness.


Hugh Dierker wrote:

>
> (the xtra recipients have a reason for inclusion of antagonists and
  protagonists) Ladies and Gentlemen, Some dude with a middle name
  Hussein made an off physically challenged remark on Leno's program.
  Before it aired, he reached out to the leader of the offended and they
  agreed to make a teaching moment out of the problem.(the middle name
  part is to recognize that some of us like them, ie eric hugh
  dierker) Perhaps here we can accomplish several good objectives out of
  this situation; Shed some light on the core programs, good, bad or
  indifferent.Once again, try to bring this list up a notch in
  efficacy.Outreach and become even more available to netizens from
  varied backgrounds and persuasions. So that we may stand on principles
  rather than personalities, until we have volunteers otherwise, we will
  move with our standing Debbie and Joe as moderators and myself as
  chair, but we will step aside as warranted and Joe will have a recusal
  on the moderation of the current consideration of bad taste. As Debbie
  reiterated for us. We do have list rules. Unless the us uproar against
  it, we will make effort to again enforce them. Glenn, thanks for all
  you do, and ... forewarned is forearmed, this may lead to
  something. Reminder on the rules of communication with the chair,
  anything you send to me privately will be respected, anything I send
  to you is fair public domain game -- not even a copywrong claim.

  --- On Wed, 4/8/09, Joe Baptista <baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

       From: Joe Baptista <baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
       Subject: Re: [ga] List Rules, moderator and chair
       To: hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx
       Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "John Palmer"
       <jpalmer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
       Date: Wednesday, April 8, 2009, 7:26 AM



       On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Hugh
       Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



            John, Jeff and Joe (J3) Gentlemen the list
            participants determined, basically by apathy, that
            the GA would be rudderless. There are rules. There
            are list moderators. There is a chair. However
            there was radical and gross opposition to such
            structure as arguably not enough participation was
            forthcoming to support legitimacy. So you are SOL.


       OK .. thats a pity.




             I suppose you have options. I will lame duck
            moderate for you. In which case a stern shame on
            you is in order as defamation would not be in
            order for the stating of what are clearly
            opinions. However I reckon I could twist some arms
            and get someone suspended for the sake of civil
            discourse..


       Well - I have no problem with that.




            You could gather ten list votes, non confidential,
            to reinstate our list rules and I will act as
            chairman for a short duration for a new election
            to take place. You would need to provide voting
            and polling booths.


       I can do that.  In fact I would prefer that we ensure the
       list rules are reinstated.  I'm sure I can come up with 10
       people - no problem.  Maybe Mr. Palmer can come up with five
       and i'll bring in the other five.

       For the purpose of determining who are the electors here I
       maintain a list of electors at URL:

       http://www.publicroot.org/GA-Electors/index.html

       For the purpose of this vote and in accordance with  Section
       8 ELECTION AND FUNCTIONS OF THE CHAIR found in the RULES OF
       ORDER AND PARTICIPATION FOR THE MAILING LISTS OF THE GENERAL
       ASSEMBLY OF THE GNSO, the following are allowed to vote.

       Date Enumerated / Email Address / Total Posts

       06 Apr 2007 / cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 28
       06 Apr 2007 / kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 39
       06 Apr 2007 / dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx  / 194
       06 Apr 2007 / bashar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 21
       06 Apr 2007 / jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 480
       06 Apr 2007 / hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx  / 311
       06 Apr 2007 / jefsey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 97
       06 Apr 2007 / gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx  / 59
       06 Apr 2007 / dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx  / 21
       06 Apr 2007 / jnevett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 12
       06 Apr 2007 / froomkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 6
       06 Apr 2007 / karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx  / 62
       06 Apr 2007 / terastra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 34
       06 Apr 2007 / baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 133
       06 Apr 2007 / tim@xxxxxxxxxxx  / 8
       06 Apr 2007 / enoss@xxxxxxxxxx  / 8
       06 Apr 2007 / narten@xxxxxxxxxx  / 42
       06 Apr 2007 / gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 60
       06 Apr 2007 / sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 43
       06 Apr 2007 / andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 33
       13 Apr 2007 / domains@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 59
       13 Apr 2007 / veni@xxxxxxxx  / 17
       27 Apr 2007 / edward@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 10
       01 Jun 2007 / konrad_brandt@xxxxxxxxx  / 5
       22 Jun 2007 / roddixon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 3
       22 Jun 2007 / faia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 13
       29 Jun 2007 / debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 121
       29 Jun 2007 / roberto@xxxxxxxxx  / 38
       29 Jun 2007 / kim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 8
       13 Jul 2007 / avri@xxxxxxx  / 11
       13 Jul 2007 / bortzmeyer@xxxxxx  / 20
       20 Jul 2007 / elisabeth.porteneuve@xxxxxxxxxxxx  / 7
       20 Jul 2007 / somitho@xxxxxxxxx  / 15
       17 Aug 2007 / kstubbs@xxxxxxxxxxxx  / 6
       7 Sep 2007 / mike@xxxxxxxxxx  / 5
       28 Sep 2007 / significants@xxxxxxxxx  / 5
       5 Oct 2007 / ross@xxxxxxxxxx  / 29
       5 Oct 2007 / peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  / 14
       5 Oct 2007 / tlda@xxxxxxxxxx  / 5
       18 Jan 2008 / jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx / 1254
       18 Jan 2008 / dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx / 140
       18 Jan 2008 / gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx / 135
       18 Jan 2008 / domains@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx / 68
       18 Jan 2008 / roberto@xxxxxxxxx / 60
       18 Jan 2008 / jefsey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx / 131
       18 Jan 2008 / karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx / 82
       18 Jan 2008 / gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx / 119
       18 Jan 2008 / debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx / 158
       18 Jan 2008 / baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx / 216
       18 Jan 2008 / andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx / 37
       18 Jan 2008 / froomkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx / 7
       18 Jan 2008 / narten@xxxxxxxxxx / 104
       18 Jan 2008 / kent@xxxxxxxxx / 9
       18 Jan 2008 / sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx / 62
       18 Jan 2008 / peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx / 15
       25 Jan 2008 / michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx / 9
       25 Jan 2008 / ross@xxxxxxxxxx / 35
       25 Jan 2008 / bashar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx / 24
       25 Jan 2008 / tlda@xxxxxxxxxxx / 14
       25 Jan 2008 / bortzmeyer@xxxxxx / 27
       25 Jan 2008 / terastra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx / 45
       15 Feb 2008 / dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx / 280
       15 Feb 2008 / cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx / 33
       15 Feb 2008 / significants@xxxxxxxxx / 6
       15 Feb 2008 / peter@xxxxxxxx / 19
       1 Feb 2008 / tlda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx / 51
       8 Feb 2008 / jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxx / 12
       8 Feb 2008 / edward@xxxxxxxxxxxxx / 16
       8 Feb 2008 / jaap@xxxxxxxxxxxx / 8
       22 Feb 2008 / baxtertms@xxxxxxxxx / 12
       22 Feb 2008 / avri@xxxxxxx / 13
       7 Mar 2008 / chris@xxxxxx / 47
       28 Mar 2008 / shane.kinsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx / 8
       28 Mar 2008 / jpalmer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx / 13
       4 Apr 2008 / elisabeth..porteneuve@xxxxxxxxxxxx / 13
       4 Apr 2008 / hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx / 349
       4 Apr 2008 / jnevett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx / 16
       27 Jun 2008 / glen@xxxxxxxxx / 91
       27 Jun 2008 / richardhenderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx / 8
       25 Jul 2008 / enoss@xxxxxxxxxx / 10




            Probably you should just recognize that certain
            elements within this list do not want it organized
            and there is not enough support to override those
            elements. Therefor suck it up, try to be nice and
            meanwhile grow some thick skin.


       I understand.  The GA however is very important to the
       inclusive name space and as such I would strongly recommend
       anyone on the GA who is also in the INS support this move to
       reinstate the rules.

       regards
       joe baptista

       p.s. and lots of XOXOXOXO to you too Hugh.




             XOXOXO

            --- On Tue, 4/7/09, John Palmer
            <jpalmer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

                 From: John Palmer
                 <jpalmer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
                 Subject: Re: [ga] Re: The Inclusive
                 Namespace now has a real E-Mail Service
                 -LionMail(tm) has been launched
                 To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
                 Date: Tuesday, April 7, 2009, 5:04 PM
                  Slander is a violaton of list rules. I
                 have made a formal complaint to the list
                 moderator, both about Mr. Baptista's
                 messages but alsoabout Mr. Williams
                 slanderous domain remarks as well.

                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: Joe Baptista
                      To: Jeffrey A. Williams
                      Cc: jp@xxxxxxxx ;
                      abuse@xxxxxxxx ; DHS cert ;
                      DHS security alert ; John
                      Palmer ;
                      hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx ;
                      ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx ; DHS info ;
                      GAO sec Greg Wilshusen ; FTC
                      IP marketplace comments ; FTC
                      OIG's office ; ICANN SSAC ;
                      ICANN SSAC Dave Piscitello ;
                      Steve Crocker ; Paul Levins ;
                      Cheryl Preston ; 2nd address
                      Cheryl Langdon-Orr ; Avri
                      Doria
                      Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009
                      5:20 PM
                      Subject: Re: [ga] Re: The
                      Inclusive Namespace now has a
                      real E-Mail Service
                      -LionMail(tm) has been
                      launched
                       Well the HEX is one big legal
                      scam and John is a major part
                      of it.  An operative of
                      sorts.  You can check his
                      association out here.

                       (false on both accounts)



       --
       Joe Baptista
       www.publicroot.org
       PublicRoot Consortium
       ----------------------------------------------------------------

       The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive,
       Representative & Accountable to the Internet community
       @large.
       ----------------------------------------------------------------

        Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052)
           Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084


>
Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 284k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln
"YES WE CAN!"  Barack ( Berry ) Obama

"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