Re: [ga] List Rules - Version 4

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Debbie and all,

  I'll be even more clear.  This rule, "not using what may be perceived
as offensive or inflammatory language" is in and of itself *perceived*
to be inflammatory by myself and any American or freedom
loving person.  It should be struck entierly.

  On a personal note, and as part of my personal style, I prefer
a little sauce with the goose, if you don't mind, and even if
you do.  >:)

Reasoning that I have not already given: A woman whom gets an
abortion by some is factually considered a murderer as are doctors
whom perform abortions.  However in accordance with Roe v Wade,
it's a womans right to choose and not murder, essentially.  Ergo terms
used in various constructs and/or contexts, and stated as facts, may or
may not be actual or proven facts but are none the less true as stated,
wheather or not broadly or narrowly considered facts.

As this list is not a court of law, and proper discovery cannot be
conducted, this rule or anything/such of its sort is an abomonation
and an afront to my and everyones right of freedom of expression
under current law.  Of course such a rule is also in violation of
ICANN's MOU with DOC/NTIA which ICANN Bylaws are
currently not in sync with, which was discussed and agreed upon
long before you were ever subscribed to this list forum, Debbie.

And I would again appriciate if you or anyone would discontinue
attempting to diminishing my and any and all Americans rights by
drafting or suggesting by drafting, such less than legal constructs
in doing so, abrogating our active open and transparent participation 
in ICANN, which is a public service corporation which requires same.

Debbie Garside wrote:

>    +1
>
> Debbie
>
>
>   _____
>
> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of
> Hugh Dierker
> Sent: 02 August 2007 16:53
> To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [ga] List Rules - Version 4
>
>
> I think the problem here is that what we really want to nail down is
> the
> intent of the poster. (and therefor the result)
> Since we are not children here we have to make room for the occasional
> and
> possibly in bad taste foul language. Actually very rare here and
> usually
> humorous or to prove some other point or to shock into gaining
> attention.
>
> So I think it would be fair to say; "not using what may be perceived
> as
> clearly intended to be offensive and/or disruptive language."
>
> Keeping in mind that someone has to complain. Also I think a monitor
> would
> easily look at the track record and matters like name calling as
> opposed to
> fact stating.
> IE. "Eric is a thief" versus "Eric took that money and I do not think
> it
> belonged to him".
>
> Bottom line though is that we are guarding against language which does
> in
> fact offend and disrupt. And that has to be sent to the monitor and
> then
> possibly the chair, in which case, probably cooling off would take
> place and
> we are all better for it.
>
> But if someone is intentionally irritating and disrupting the list -
> she is
> going to get the boot because this is not an exercise matt for free
> speech
> abuse.
>
> Eric
>
>
> Debbie Garside <debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Jeff
>
> Responses in line:
>
> > First and again, please trim/discontinue CC'ing already
> > subscribed GA list members as you yourself have mentioned
> > several times, as it is incredibly rude and a waste of band
> > width. This will be the 14th time I have trimmed them for
> > you. So again please practice what you preach.
>
> Thank you for the reminder. It will take me a while to get used to the
> new
> rules instead of just clicking reply all - a habit hard to break. :-)
>
> > Second, about Version 4 of the Rule..
> >
> > Rule:
> > "not using what may be perceived as offensive or
> > inflammatory language"
> >
> > ?: what is the definition of the terms "inflammatory
> > language" in context of these proposed set of rules?
>
> > ...[original message trimmed]
>
> > Therefore, and as such, I oppose this rule as currently stated...
>
> Would you like to re-draft this particular paragraph or would the
> following
> suffice?
>
> ---
>
> - not using what may be perceived as offensive language
>
> ---
>
> Best
>
> Debbie
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   _____
>
> Luggage? GPS? Comic books?
> Check out fitting gifts
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com
> evt=48249/*http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_
> mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz> for grads at Yahoo! Search.
>
>
>

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obediance 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