<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] IDNO/ Our online list rules.
- To: ga <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [ga] IDNO/ Our online list rules.
- From: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 18:48:23 -0700 (PDT)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=mU+EP26q4rPKbd/lV0lIoUZ6W5K2qdnPGcG3trh5eiyYXFOemN69mX53SVWByopp2O7ghqU2m1NQ/KvFJUIyWpBrzeWqKENtGMGYWwUFaGzp7u6SoaFTsQb4C7QclPhEjt6DMj3PDd5yiXoGedpXoFDwo9tx21D1XhtxHDNZ5zo=;
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
As I am getting through this IDNO petition and charter I ran into section 9.
I then rummaged around and found nothing that suspends or cancels the existing behavior moderation protocol set forth for the GA.
I like the IDNOs conceptual model but actually liked the GAs more. It clearly comes down to personalities running the show, as there is no guarantee of free speech on our lists.
Currently I think Joe is doing just fine. But he is going to have to deal with overzealous overabundant posting. So in the meantime does anyone have an objection to my position that the rules are still in place and we should enforce them as we see fit?
Eric
---------------------------------
Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels
in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|