Re: [ga] Adoption of proposed amendments to the list rules

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

Appropriate postings,
   
  I think general rules of Defamation should be the limit. It would not be appropriate to disparage another in their profession or assert that they have certain diseases or insanties. Referring to another onlist as a deadbeat would certainly be wrong. As always calling someone a liar is taboo. That is just for on this list, just like "in this office" or "in my home".
   
  The same is not true of the Chair. There is no personal defilement that is out of bounds. So Jeff or anyone else can say as many bad things about the Chair as they can think of to say.
  Herein lies the rub. The Chair is not required to read it. And if one persons posts are more likely than not carrying insults and false negative innuendos without facts to support them, then probably the Chair will elect not to read that poster. The sad thing for both parties is that they will miss out on the occassional positive contribution from each other. Something like always crying wolf.
   
  Eric
   
   
   
  

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;}      Mr. Dierker and all,
   
    Yet another flip-flop?  Seem so here in these remarks below.  First
  draft rules, than Mr. dierker several times ask for amendments, several
  forum members posted amendments including myself three times, seconded
  Teds twice, and made a motion for another amendment, than voting in which
  all of 11 out of 200+ GA forum members voted.  Again durring the vote, Mr. 
  Dierker ask for amendments, and again I, Ted and two other members posted
  proposed amendments.  Than Mr. Dierker suggested no amending durring voting
  period which seems to be another flip-flop ergo poor process/procedure.  Than
  Debbie ask me to repost those amendments.  I said no because I and others
  have posted them several times already and they are avaliable in the archives
  of this GA forum.  Than in another flip-flop, Mr. Dierker decides that it doesn't
  matter what amendments essentially.  Than Debbie says she cannot remember
  any amendments being posted.  
   
    What a saga, eh!   But not really anything out of the ordinary for Mr. Dierker
  of given the history of the GA.



  -----Original Message----- 
From: Hugh Dierker 
Sent: Aug 24, 2007 7:15 PM 
To: GA 
Subject: [ga] Adoption of proposed amendments to the list rules 

  This being close of business in the Jurisdiction and time zone of ICANN, and there being no objection of process or substance, the proposed amendments to our list rules are adopted.
   
  I ask Madame Editor to make it so and publish the new Rules with amendments.
   
  Eric
  as Chair 
  '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


       
---------------------------------
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.