Re: [ga] Maintenance and Management of the GA
- To: Thomas Narten <narten@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [ga] Maintenance and Management of the GA
- From: George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 06:54:49 -0700 (PDT)
--- On Fri, 9/25/09, Thomas Narten <narten@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I would welcome a forum where general discussion of matters
> importance to ICANN could be discussed in a thoughtful
> manner. But
> this list clearly does achieve such a goal, by almost any
> metric one
> could imagine. (My favorite metric is that Jeff Williams
I believe you meant "doesn't achieve".
> this list in terms of number of postings, which pretty much
> says it
Exactly, thanks for running the weekly reports. Are you able to run one massive
report for all time periods since you've kept track?
> Does anyone else besides me think that the GNSO should
> acknowledge the uselessness of this list and shut the list
> And if so, how do we make it so?
I think the best approach might be to let it continue, but create a competing
list. Given the competing list, as previously discussed, most people who are
serious and involved in constituencies would unsubscribe from this one and join
the new one. And perhaps you can continue running the automated report on this
list and add a "reminder" to any newbie that finds it that they should join a
constituency to join the new list.
Kind of like how ICANN continues to let .su stay in the root, and how IPv4 will
continue for decades. :)
I'm sure some will continue to subscribe to the GA list (since the public might
bring up important issues that those in constituencies might have missed), and
then forward those issues to the new list for debate.