[ga] GA irrelevant

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Roberto,

I agree with you that it is a shame how the GA has become irrelevant.

However, the activity of the remaining posters on this list and its poor 
signal/noise ration is a symptom of this, not the cause.
Those who have actively resisted registrant representation should accept the 
symptoms and side-effects of incapacitating  at-large stakeholders.
Do you have a proposal to make the GA more relevant again in ICANN policy 
setting?

Joop


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 10:57 AM
Subject: RE: [ga] Re:


> Sotiris,
> You are, as often happens, right in asking for moderation. However, I do 
> not
> feel, personally, tha this is the main issue.
> Filters can go a long way in eliminating noise, but they cannot create
> signal: the problem of this list, the way I see it, is not excessive 
> noise,
> but lack of signal.
> There are lots of things going on, that are *really* related to domain 
> name
> policy, but nothing of value is happening here. The GA has become
> irrelevant, and that's a shame.
> Regards,
> Roberto
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> > sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: Wednesday, 28 April 2010 23:17
> > To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [ga] Re:
> >
> >
> > Dare I recommend some moderation?
> >
> > Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> >
> > >
> > > Ken Stubbs wrote:
> > >
> > > I have been a subscriber to this list for almost 12 years
> > now and have
> > > recently seen the list value diminsh significantly
> > (primarily because
> > > of threads like this one)..
> > >
> > > Its sad to see a forum for
> > > discussion, (purportedly ICANN related), degenerate to this level.
> > >
> > > Hopefully subscribers can still find some value in it, but, I am
> > > rapidly losing hope that this is possible..