[ga-abuse] URGENT - List Panel Protocols

["Patrick Corliss" <patrick@corliss.net>]

On Thursday, May 03, 2001 8:23 PM (AEST), Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
Subject: [ga-abuse] Re: Posting Rights - Six New Mailing Lists


> At 00:13 03.05.2001 +1000, Patrick Corliss wrote:
> >As a majority of three list monitors have agreed, I will advise Elisabeth
to
> >suspend Jeff Williams and Joe Baptista from the six new mailing lists.
>
> This decision must be published to the GA - saying it is a job for the
> chairs, I think. Any debate should be done on ga-int, I think.
> And suspensions on the new lists should wait until the policy has been
> announced.

Hi Danny

Four out of five list monitors (i.e. all except Harald) have agreed that a
person suspended from the main list should be suspended from all sublists.
There are two such persons viz.  Jeff Williams and Joe Baptista.  Now we
have agreed I'd like to implement this decision.

I am concerned that Jeff Williams is posting his head off while we, the
lists monitors, discuss what to do.  The longer we wait, the more likely it
will be that we appear arbitrary.  Meanwhile, unless advised otherwise, Joe
Baptista will assume he is still suspended.

Harald thinks that this policy should first be published to the GA list.  I
disagree but wish to consult with you as Chair.  I suggest the following
protocols:

(1)    A majority of the panel of list monitors can make decisions relating
to the the main GA list or any of its sublists in respect of:

    (a)    the procedures to be adopted by the panel in making its decision,
and
    (b)    the posting rights of persons subscribed to any of these lists.

(2)    That such decisions can be conveyed to the DNSO Secretariat who will
implement them accordingly.

(3)    That either the DNSO Secretariat or the Co-Chair will then notify the
relevant person and/or the GA List generally of the decision.

(4)    That all decisions made by the panel of list monitors, whether
considered policy of practice, are appealable to the Chair by the person
affected.

My view is decisions by a majority of the Panel are likely to be
well-considered.  Respect for the Chair is maintained if he remains above
the debate. However, the Chair may intervene at any time when he considers
it would be equitable or appropriate.

The list procedures are certain to be debated on the [ga-int] mailing list
but I would rather have a fairly simple protocol in the meantime.  Stockholm
is coming very soon and we really do need to get the rest of the debate onto
a proper foundation.

At present, for example, William X. Walsh is arguing that we need to agree
that there is even a problem in respect of the alt roots before we consider
any policy recommendations.  If we have to poll members just to agree that
there is a problem this is just added delay.

Regards
Patrick Corliss