[ga-abuse] Re: Complainant - Jefssey Morfin

["Alternate Chair, GA" <patrick@corliss.net>]

Official mail sent privately.  Posted to [ga-abuse] for the record

----- Original Message -----
From: Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>
To: Patrick Corliss <patrick@corliss.net>
Cc: Elisabeth Porteneuve <Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr>
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 9:28 PM (AEST)
Subject: Re: Complainant - Jefssey Morfin


Dear Patrick,
1. I consider your abuse policy absurd and not submitted to any standing
rule
2. to show my point I picked a mail from Danny which is by your standard
abusive
3. I complained about it making clear in the text why it was hurting
4. you asked some administrative trivia through a spearted mail I responded
5. having lost track of my complaint you asked me to reformulate it and
accompanyied it with a small recital I find hurting as per the same
standards. So I complain now about you too.
6. now you want I burry the case in this ga-int of yours, you want I
Chair.....
and you spend DNSO money in calling on poor Elisabeth (hi! Elisabeth)
I think I fully made my point...
Jefsey

PS. BTW Elisabeth, you charge so much the NC for the GA-full that they want
to close it? How much is that (for he time being it is just for some two to
three Erics' posts a day...)




At 05:39 11/05/01, Patrick Corliss wrote:
>Dear Jefsey
>
>I have explained as clearly and courteously as I can.  You will make a
>formal complaint.  It will be dealt with in accordance with the rules.  You
>have said:
>
> > I see from your response that you only intended to waste time
> > and bore me out. I do consider this response as abusive.
>
>It is my intention that proper allowance be made for language difficulties.
>I have therefore provided a copy of this email to Elisabeth Porteneuve, the
>DNSO Secretariat, who may explain, if necessary, in the French language.
>
>Personally, I believe this is not necessary as any misinterpretation is not
>one of language.  Nevertheless, I do not wish to deny you a proper
>opportunity.
>
>You have said you will publish your complaint to the GA.  I would ask that
>you use the GA-INT list as this was set up for the purpose.
>
>Meanwhile I post your private email to [ga-abuse] for the record.
>
>Sincerely
>Alternate Chair
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>
>To: Patrick Corliss <patrick@corliss.net>
>Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 5:57 AM (AEST)
>Subject: Re: [ga-abuse] Re: [ga] Re: [ADMIN] Two Week Suspension of Eric
>Dierker
>
>Dear Patrick,
>I see from your response that you only intended to waste time
>and bore me out. I do consider this response as abusive.
>
>1) you receive a complaint corresponding to a mail
>2) you ask more information
>3) I give it to you
>4) you start your response with a small lesson about ListMonitors
>      duties as if I was a dump kid of 3, or as if you copied Danny's
>      abusive mail.
>5) you eventually respond you do not know which mail I am
>      complaining about  and you ask me to complain again.
>
>I will therefore publish complaint to the GA with a summary of this
>obstrusive exchange.
>Regards
>Jefsey
>
>On 22:53 08/05/01, Patrick Corliss said:
> >On Tuesday, May 08, 2001 5:53 PM (AEST), Jefsey Morfin wrote:
> >Subject: Re: [ga-abuse] Re: [ga] Re: [ADMIN] Two Week Suspension of Eric
> >Dierker
> >
> > > On 16:23 07/05/01, Alternate Chair, GA said:
> > > >On behalf on the List Monitor Committee I ask you to please specify
the
> >rule
> > > >under which you are making your complaint against the Chair.  These
>rules
> > > >can be found at:
> > > >
> > > >http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2000.GA-ga-rules-v0.4.html
> > > >
> > > I have detailed the complaints I submited in my mail. IRT the rules
> > > under which I make these complaints they are :
> > >
> > > - indulging in personal attack <snip>
> > > - violation of the rule of appeal <snip>
> > > - violation of common sense <snip>
> > >
> > > Thank you for your attention/
> >
> >Dear Jefsey
> >
> >Thank you for your reply.  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 would ask you again to please specify your complaint.  Which posting?
> >Which rule?  In case it's not clear, a "violation of common sense" does
not
> >fall within this framework.  I am sure you understand quite clearly.
> >
> >The [ga-abuse] mailing list was not intended for correspondence of this
>type
> >and this matter is not a subject of further debate.  You will make a
formal
> >complaint.  It will be dealt with in accordance with the rules.
> >
> >Sincerely
> >Alternate Chair