Re: [ga-abuse] Mailing Lists

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@Alvestrand.no>]

At 03:05 16.05.2001 +1000, Alternate Chair, GA wrote:
>To Chair cc DNSO Secretariat, List Monitors
>
>I am sorry but I must reduce the traffic on my email  client.  I am now
>getting all of the bounced messages from Jeff Williams and Eric Dierker as
>well as those below.  I am also subscribed to all of the sublists as well as
>NCDNHC, ICANN-Europe, Domain Policy, OSRC, TLDA and our local DNS.  I also
>receive mail from the AUDA and TLDA Boards as well as correspondence with
>Elisabeth, Danny and the Monitors.

Patrick,
learn to filter. I get all the bounce messages from dnso-ga too, but look 
at them only rarely. They take up no more than disk space and download time 
for me. (My total traffic rarely exceeds 500 messages per day, btw)

>I am also concerned that we are all working too hard and miss some of each
>other's messages.  The lists are under discussion and I feel we are in
>danger of losing control of the situation.  We also need to clarify the
>procedures between us.

The list monitors are concerned with abuses. The chairs should be concerned 
with shaping (not controlling) the debate.
The stuff below doesn't really concern the moderator function....


>As far as I'm concerned the Chair and the Alternate Chair are in charge of
>the mailing lists with the DNSO Secretariat performing the admin function.
>I do not really wish to debate every little point as this is a waste of
>resources.
>
>(1)    Danny has appointed me as in charge of the lists.  He has set up six
>sublists although I suggested five.  I see GA-EXT and GA-REVIEW overlap
>considerably.  So far only ONE person has volunteered to be a Chair for any
>of the lists.
>
>(2)    All rejected messages are bounced to me as the list owner.  One list
>example is <owner-ga-tm@dnso.org>.  There are two types indicated in the
>"From":
>
>*    From the list owner.  These are cross-posted messages and they should
>bounced back to the sender.  It should be possible to configure in that way.
>*    From the Mailer-Daemon (such as below).  These are undelivered mail and
>they should be dealt with after 3 days (not one week as previously
>suggested).

the important point is really to NOT act on them too soon - if someone's 
mail server crashes on Friday afternoon, and is fixed on Monday, he should 
not lose his subscription. I often let bouncers stay on my lists for 
months, and then go into a paroxysm of deleting everyone who has more than 
10 bounces recently...

>(3)    Some of the lists still need to get going.  One or two people do not
>understand the difference between the lists.  Some, like Jefsey, are
>deliberately hostile.  I don't know what's involved but the lists need to be
>renamed.  I'd prefer the following:
>
>*    GA-INT should be called GA-RULES
>*    GA-EXT should be called GA-ICANN
>*    GA-TM should be called GA-UDRP

I would agree if they were not already established, but think that renaming 
will serve to confuse only. These names are in filters all over the net by now.

>(4)    The GA-REVIEW list is not being used.  I don't know whether Danny can
>get it started quickly.  Who was involved in the "review"?  Who was the
>Chair?  If they won't help then the list must be killed off as too
>confusing.

The ICANN Review group was moved en masse to wg-review@yahoogroups.com, and 
has been disowned by ICANN. Still 20 msgs/day.
I suggest leaving the list, in case we need it later, but not doing 
anything to revive it now. Empty lists are VERY cheap to run.

>(5)    Chairs need to be appointed.  Only one person has volunteered.
>That's William S. Lovell for GA-EXT or as I suggest GA-ICANN.  Is there any
>possibility that one of the list monitors will take GA-INT or as I suggest
>GA-RULES?  Alexander?  Harald?

I cannot take the chair. I will participate and support a chair.

>If we don't sort out these problems quickly we are losing time and energy.

not that we had that much energy to begin with....