List rules/missives to: Re: [ga] FYI:Google's chief legal officer slapped with SEC fines

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Debbie and all,

  It seems you are implying my post was inflammatory.  It was not!
All of it was fact.  Facts regardless of how stated cannot be
inflammatory if stated honestly.
I expect an apology immediately.  This sort of snide and innuendo
should NEVER be considered reasonable.  As such any further
work by you Debbie on list rules will be viewed by myself and hopefully
by all GA members with great sceptatism.  Apologies to the chair
for Debbies missive here and my necessary rebut accordingly.

Thank you Dr. Joe for your well reasoned and logical response.
Your doing a wonderful job despite Debbies missives of late.

Dr. Dierker, Chair, I no longer have confidence in Debbies
objectivity in list rules development.

Debbie Garside wrote:

>    A possible rewording of the paragraph in question:
>
> ----
>
> 3. The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including:
>
> - not indulging in what may be perceived as personal attacks or
> insults or
> any other behaviour considered inflammatory
>
> ----
>
> We could, perhaps, add a further sanction, at the discretion of the
> Chair or
> List Monitor to suspend first offenders for 48 hours for persistent
> OT/inflammatory postings.
>
> I also feel that we should tighten up on the sanctions to be imposed -
> with
> actual time scales designated for suspension etc.
>
>  In the light of comments on and off list, I am thinking that there
> should
> be a rule introduced for persistent offenders that would permanently
> exclude
> them from the forum - for example, 4 sanctions imposed within a given
> time
> period, say 6 months, would mean the offender is excluded for 6
> months, with
> return to the forum allowed only under certain conditions - e.g. 2
> sanctions
> for a repeat offender would mean 1 year exclusion with return allowed
> under
> "probation".
>
> Debbie
>
> (who is not altogether innocent herself - but is prepared to suffer
> the
> consequences in the future - at the Chairs/List Monitors discretion)
>
>
>
>
>   _____
>
> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of
> Debbie Garside
> Sent: 23 July 2007 15:24
> To: hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx; 'Jeff Williams'
> Cc: 'General Assembly of the DNSO'
> Subject: RE: [ga] FYI:Google's chief legal officer slapped with SEC
> fines
>
>
> +1
>
> I think we have already covered this within the draft Rules:
>
> ----
>
> 3. The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including:
>
> - not indulging in what may be perceived as personal attacks, insults
> or
> slander
>
>
>
> ----
>
> Perhaps we could tighten up on this wording
>
> Best
>
> Debbie
>
>
>   _____
>
> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of
> Hugh Dierker
> Sent: 23 July 2007 15:06
> To: Jeff Williams
> Cc: General Assembly of the DNSO
> Subject: Re: [ga] FYI:Google's chief legal officer slapped with SEC
> fines
>
>
> This is an example of way off topic. This thread should stop here.
> Clever
> tie ins' attacking the charactar of BoD members does not create
> relevance.
>
> However this may become relevant to discuss what should or should not
> be
> allowed in context.
>
> Eric
>
> This is worse than over posting.
>
> Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Lauren,
>
> Read/sounds like World/com/con all over again. I wonder if this
> idiot was on the legal council of Worldcom when it did the same
> thing?
>
> Seems Vint has some serious "Evangelizing" to do. And this brings
> me back to ICANN again, as Vint sits on ICANN's Bod as chairman,
> seems to me there is some consideration regarding conflict of Interest
>
> here...
>
> http://
> ww.networkworld.com/news/2007/072007-googles-chief-legal-officer-sla
> pped.html?netht=072007dailynews1&
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   _____
>
> Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=47093/*http://tv.
> ahoo.com/collections/222> with
> an Edge to see what's on, when.
>
>
>

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