RE: [ga-abuse] Re: URGENT - List Panel Protocols

[R.Gaetano@iaea.org]

Patrick,

> 
> I'm simply setting up a scenario to continue to suspend two 
> people who were
> already suspended and for which there is no present policy.  
> Until a policy
> is decided using the list framework that we have set up for that very
> purpose !!!
> 
> What amazes me is why it should be so much hard work to 
> suspend people who
> are already suspended ;-)
> 


A warning here: if we don't proceed this way, i.e. with hard and careful
work for something that may appear obvious, we will spend the time from now
to Stockholm to debate on the list(s) about the censorship attitude of the
Chairman, his Alternate, the List Monitors, and how this relates to the
general dictatorial approach of ICANN, and from there to .....

Some work now is a good investment to have cristal clear procedures that
minimize the risk of personal judgement getting into the picture.


.......
> 
> It's a matter of politics.  If we announce to the list that we have
> introduced a new policy to suspend him when he's alrready 
> been suspended,
> people will argue.  The default position is that he will 
> continue to post to
> the sublists.
> 
> That's the wrong way round.  He is suspended.  The default 
> position should
> be that he does NOT post.  Then we can discuss the policy.


Past experience shows that it does not work that way.
Frankly, I prefer to have suspended people's messages on the sublists for a
couple of days than all lists flooded with "censorship again" messages.

> 
> > My best regards,
> > Elisabeth
> > (NB. Sorry for stating it sharp, it is not intended to be offensive)
> 
> Me too, if you think I am sharp.  But this is very tiresome.  So far,
> including some postings which were complained about, I have 
> 321 postings in
> my folder for GA-ABUSE.  Just reading them is a burden.
> 
> Meanwhile I'm looking for emails I wrote about some of the 
> complaints.  As
> well I have not yet arranged funding to go to Stockholm.


Is at least Danny going?
If neither of you goes, I suggest the Chairs to appoint somebody to run the
physical meeting well before the meeting.

> 
> By then nothing will be achieved except a couple of suspensions.
> And then only of the two people who are already suspended !!
> 
> It's already clear that everybody else is going to get a warning.
> As this includes every malpractice imaginable I'm disappointed.
> 
> Best regards
> Patrick> 


Best regards
Roberto