Re: [ga-abuse] [Fwd: BOUNCE ga-roots@dnso.org]

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

If this bothers only me I will accept it as a personal problem.  If it bothers
any one else I will accept that as your problem.  If it bothers a few then I
will accept it as a major problem.  For most of you it is better you do not
comment.  For some changing the rules in midstream may prove troublesome, and
for some the "alt-chair" running the entire show may be a problem.  for some
this will seem fair comment for others an excuse not to participate.

Kristee please accept my public apology, I know you are doing your best under
difficult circumstances, and I apologize for any wrong I committed against you.

Sincerely,

"Alternate Chair, GA" wrote:

> Hi Eric
>
> Thank you for your email.  The List Monitors have a large number of
> complaints to deal with.  The process is plain and simple.  A complainant
> makes a complaint that a particular posting breached a particular rule.  The
> Committee then examines that posting to see if it breached the rule.
>
> I am happy to answer you inquiries directly.  It has been agreed by the list
> monitors and posted to the list that persons suspended may post to [ga] and
> this will form part of the official record as shown in [ga-full].
>
> The [ga-abuse] list was not intended for correspondence of this type.
> Should you wish to debate the merits of the decision, or the procedures
> generally, this can be done on the [ga] mailing list.
>
> Sincerely
> Alternate Chair
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>
> To: [ga-abuse] <ga-abuse@dnso.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 4:59 PM
> Subject: [ga-abuse] [Fwd: BOUNCE ga-roots@dnso.org]
>
> > Wait just a minute here is Corliss changing the rules again and a
> > censorship/sanction means more that not being distributed but now means
> > not part of the official record of a list?
> >
> > Please someone correct my ignorance, for I truly cannot accept what I
> > see as the plain words of Mr. Corliss be correct.