Re: [ga] List Rules (as Chair)

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

Mere slip of the old deja vue pen, off list of course. However as always all of my posts are appropriate for public consumption. I think the term would be caustic not antagonistic.
   
  Due well protaganist.
   
  Eric
  Not as Silla.

jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
    body{font-family: Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color: #ffffff;color: black;}      body{font-family: Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color: #ffffff;color: black;}      Eric,
   
    Ha ha, very funny!  >:)  However if serious, why the antagonism?
  Or do you enjoy antagonistic behavior?



  -----Original Message----- 
From: Hugh Dierker 
Sent: Jul 13, 2007 8:14 PM 
To: jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Subject: Re: [ga] List Rules (as Chair) 

  Why are you participating on the GA George, oops, I mean Jeff?
  This is a GA of ICANN.
   
  Eric

jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
    body{font-family: Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color: #ffffff;color: black;}    Eric,
   
    As you have seen, there is no respect for the ICANN structure.
  So why is that even an issue?  Clearly by now you know it is not.



  -----Original Message----- 
From: Hugh Dierker 
Sent: Jul 13, 2007 8:43 AM 
To: Jeff Williams 
Subject: Re: [ga] List Rules (as Chair) 

  I am to consider these as generic objections to the GA. They are understood and noted. I do not see them leading to a constructive discussion of the topic of getting rules for the GA to follow. 
  Clearly we could write up rules that are antagonistic to the NC and not in keeping with goals and practices of the GNSO. But this is not an independent list. We want recognition from the NC and we want the technical assistance they are capable of providing and in fact do provide.
  We want our voices heard and given some respect within the ICANN structure. There are many places outside where the prevalent attitude of your post would be welcome, although perhaps not in the manner given.
   
  You would be correct that the rules are taken and rewritten from the old rules, I thought that was made clear during discussions leading up to the writing. The old rules have not been abrogated by fiat or vote. They are in place until new ones are adopted.
   
  I think your lone voice is great and may even reflect in some fashion the members here who are frustrated and fed up with the GNSO structure and the BoD response to it. But your voice does not assist in accomplishing the task at hand.
   
  However the last of your post seems to change directions and provide some concrete objections. Although no suggestions. So I will leave it all attached to the post.
   
  Eric
  as Chair

Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
  Dr. Dierker and all,

I see a few problems here that are a matter of subjective
reasoning. As follows:

"The purpose of the GA list is to allow discussion between GA members on

GA matters. It is not itself a decision-making body. The GA members
may, however, formulate such collective opinions into consensus
documents as designated by its members for submission to other bodies."

If the GA is not a decision making body, than what's the point?
Why bother to become a member? Doesn't seem like any GA
I have ever served on. ALL General Assemblies I ever served
on were indeed, "a decision making body". Why have elections
for any GA position or motion?

"(b) The GA may meet once a year, if possible in conjunction with
regularly
scheduled meetings of the Board. To the maximum extent practicable, all
meetings should be available for online attendance as well as physical
attendance.

(c) The costs of GA meetings shall be the responsibility of the GNSO,
which may
levy an equitable, cost-based fee on GA attendees to recoup those
costs. There
shall be no other fees required to participate in the GA."

This basically makes GA members surfs or slaves of a sort and therefore
nearly powerless which is useless. It is also at a minimum an
abrogation
of the MOU, if not an outright violation of same. I am ashamed to
even see it being a consideration of any sort. >:(


And further:
3. POSTING RULES

- not indulging in personal attacks, insults or slander

- not using offensive language

How is "offensive language" defined. What definition of "offensive
language".

What is a definition of an "insult" and how does one prove slander on
a mailing list?

"If the identity behind some email address set is challenged, the list
monitor may ask the challenged party for proof of identity. The list
monitor has discretion in deciding
whether to take action upon a challenge, and to decide what proof of
identity is
acceptable in each particular case. A notarized copy of a civil
identification
(such as a driver's license or passport) is always acceptable."

The above violates civil state statutes in my state of texas. In fact

the Texas AG's office recommends I as a Texas citizen notify their
office
of such information is ask for by any non law enforcement agency or
person. By law, I cannot comply with this. Further in 24 states this
rule would be in violation of those states civil statutes which have
changed in only the past year. So I ask, and strongly suggest this
rule be stricken or *modified* in accordance to, or with same. It
is also in violation with the EU's new privacy regs., which I posted
to Dr. Dierker and this list forum as an FYI.


Hugh Dierker wrote:

> So in our quest to make the List Rules available to all, Debbie
> came up with a wonderful solution. I think this takes care of
> complaints, and maximizes capability for involvement.
> It would appear that our biggest "problem" is any one caring,
> because the rules are so mondane and generally acceptable to everyone.
>
> Here is something really cool;
> http://www.geolang.com/draftGAListRules.htm

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k 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
Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827



  
Regards,
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k 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
Registered Email addr with the USPS Contact Number: 214-244-4827

  
Regards,
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k 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
Registered Email addr with the USPS Contact Number: 214-244-4827


 
---------------------------------
Bored stiff? Loosen up...
Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games.