Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #56
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST           Thursday, April 13 2000           Volume 01 : Number 056

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 16:15:46 -0500
From: Dori Kornfeld <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [Admin] Removal of posting rights

Regardless of the content of messages and whether some messages are more
"appropriate" than others, I think the GA is losing sight of its mission by
engaging in censorship. The GA has already lost many valuable members and
will no doubt lose more as the arguments continue. ICANN, in theory, is
supposed to be an open process and the GA a forum in which interest parties
and individuals may deliberate. Perhaps a better method of "regulating the
noise" would be to send out notices that the GA list monitor suggests that
subscribers make individual filters for particular people. At least then
the GA members would be able to control their own content, and the GA could
become a more credible and legitimate forum for open communication.

- -Dori Kornfeld

At 9:06 AM +0200 4/11/00, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
>The enclosed paragraph is considered irrelevant to the business of the GA,
>a personal attack, insulting and slanderous.
>
>The posting rights of "Jeff Williams" are hereby suspended for 4 week starting
>today, lasting until May 9, 2000.
>
>Decisions of the GA list monitor can be appealed to the GA chair.
>
>                        Harald Tveit Alvestrand
>                            GA list monitor
>
>
>At 01:02 11.04.2000 -0700, Jeff Williams wrote:
>>Andy and all assembly members,
>>
>>  As you know
>>Jonathan Cohen as a known pedophile has a vested interest in shifting
>>attention from that fact, to denigrating others in a manner as public
>>as possible so as to keep his particular life style in the background.
>
>
>--
>Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
>[email-masked]
>
>--
>This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
>Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
>("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
>Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 22:28:53 +0200
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [Admin] Removal of posting rights

At 16:15 11.04.2000 -0500, Dori Kornfeld wrote:
>Regardless of the content of messages and whether some messages are more
>"appropriate" than others, I think the GA is losing sight of its mission by
>engaging in censorship. The GA has already lost many valuable members and
>will no doubt lose more as the arguments continue. ICANN, in theory, is
>supposed to be an open process and the GA a forum in which interest parties
>and individuals may deliberate. Perhaps a better method of "regulating the
>noise" would be to send out notices that the GA list monitor suggests that
>subscribers make individual filters for particular people. At least then
>the GA members would be able to control their own content, and the GA could
>become a more credible and legitimate forum for open communication.

This has been suggested before. Practice has proved it ineffective.

Remember: At the moment, there are exactly TWO persons barred from posting 
on the GA list.

                     Harald

- --
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
[email-masked]

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 13:55:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [Admin] Removal of posting rights

- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11-Apr-2000 Dori Kornfeld wrote:
> Regardless of the content of messages and whether some messages are more
> "appropriate" than others, I think the GA is losing sight of its mission by
> engaging in censorship. The GA has already lost many valuable members and

This is not censorship.  It is enforcement of rules of civil discourse.

> will no doubt lose more as the arguments continue. ICANN, in theory, is
> supposed to be an open process and the GA a forum in which interest parties
> and individuals may deliberate. Perhaps a better method of "regulating the
> noise" would be to send out notices that the GA list monitor suggests that
> subscribers make individual filters for particular people. At least then
> the GA members would be able to control their own content, and the GA could
> become a more credible and legitimate forum for open communication.

Sorry, but I fail to see how letting someone post indiscriminately slanderous
comments such as the one that initiated this action helps lead to "open
communication" and a deliberative process.

To call this censorship is an abuse of the term, and an insult to those of us
who stand and fight against real issues of censorship.

- - --
William X. Walsh <[email-masked]>
http://userfriendly.com/
GPG/PGP Key at http://userfriendly.com/wwalsh.gpg
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.1c (Mandrake Linux)
Comment: Userfriendly Networks http://www.userfriendly.com/

iD8DBQE485FX8zLmV94Pz+IRAoAnAJ969dcZejYMPBt/Rr+jeQBEvqQSGACglWwc
cFmsbUO+lZ5dkqSJuvunVK4=
=LIwV
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 04:15:31 +0200 (MET DST)
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [Admin] Removal of posting rights

Dori Kornfeld wrote:

>Regardless of the content of messages and whether some messages are 
more
>"appropriate" than others, I think the GA is losing sight of its 
mission by
>engaging in censorship.

I probably miss your point.
Are you saying that GA is "losing sight of its mission" by trying to 
react to gratuitous libel and slander, and lack of civil discourse?
I think that GA would be even more "losing sight of its mission" by 
allowing this kind of accusations, or the publication of messages of 
pornographic contents, or the forging of E-Mail, or all other amenities,
 without reaction.
I confess I do not understand the disclaim "Regardless of the content of
 messages and whether some messages are more "appropriate" than others".
 This is exactly the point. The sanction is applied "precisely" because 
of the contents of the messages. Do you think that this attitude of 
moving the focus of the debate from DNS-related argumentation to 
personal insults is more in line with the mission of the GA than the 
attempt to limit these insults?
This reminds me the story of the lawyer defending a serial killer by 
asserting that "if we make abstraction from the murders, the defendant 
is a nice person and not a danger for the society".

I am personally inclined to give to the authors of these postings the 
importance they deserve (=zero), but I cannot ignore the sentiments of 
people like Jonathan Cohen (or Elisabeth Porteneuve, that had also heavy
 personal attacks in the past). 

> The GA has already lost many valuable members and
>will no doubt lose more as the arguments continue.

In fact, a lot of people had already left the GA in the times when we 
(Chair & AltChair) have been at the window, looking at the events 
without taking responsability for the management of the civil discourse 
rules.
The (regrettable and regretted) loss of people following the adoption of
 the current rules has been largely offset numerically by new 
subscriptions (including returns of former members who had left because 
of our inaction).

> ICANN, in theory, is
>supposed to be an open process and the GA a forum in which interest 
parties
>and individuals may deliberate.

IMHO, "open forum" is not synonimous of "wild west", and "democracy" is 
not a synonim of "anarchy".
To allow the Wild West rule to govern the GA is, still IMHO, worse than 
take sanctions.
In this respect, may I suggest to read the valuable work of the Berkman 
Center - see http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/projects/deliberation/ - 
reference already posted by Diane Cabell to this list.

I guess that the Berkman Center will welcome comments, BTW.

> Perhaps a better method of "regulating the
>noise" would be to send out notices that the GA list monitor suggests 
that
>subscribers make individual filters for particular people. At least 
then
>the GA members would be able to control their own content, and the GA 
could
>become a more credible and legitimate forum for open communication.
>

GA members are *already* able to control the content. They have freedom 
of choice between subscription to the unabridged version of the GA 
postings, or to the "list with rules".
As I commented to the NC in the open meeting in Cairo, the fact that 
only 3 (three) individuals chose to enjoy the traffic on the list in its
 integral version clearly indicates that the vast majority does not 
think that the sanctions applied are liberticide.

Please note that I am not claiming that the application of these 
sanctions and rules are "perfect". What I am claiming is that they are 
better than to assist without doing anything to the progressive 
deterioration of the debate and to the multiplication of the insults and
 attacks "ad personam", that already caused the death of other mailing 
lists.

Best regards
Roberto
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 18:13:32 -0400
From: "Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] [Admin] Removal of posting rights

I find the minimal amount of process which Harald has established very
helpful in ensuring that the GA list can actually do work. I don't support
broad and invasive censoring, Dori, but the kind of paramaters I've seen so
far are extremely minimalistic, and are focused on trying to keep work on
track and not have GA be filled with non productive and even hostile noise
which makes it less likely that others will continue to remain. 

And, I've noticed that all removals are time bound, so there is always the
opportunity for a return to the list...

Marilyn Cade

- -----Original Message-----
From: Dori Kornfeld [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 5:16 PM
To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand
Cc: [email-masked]; Jonathan Cohen; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] [Admin] Removal of posting rights

Regardless of the content of messages and whether some messages are more
"appropriate" than others, I think the GA is losing sight of its mission by
engaging in censorship. The GA has already lost many valuable members and
will no doubt lose more as the arguments continue. ICANN, in theory, is
supposed to be an open process and the GA a forum in which interest parties
and individuals may deliberate. Perhaps a better method of "regulating the
noise" would be to send out notices that the GA list monitor suggests that
subscribers make individual filters for particular people. At least then
the GA members would be able to control their own content, and the GA could
become a more credible and legitimate forum for open communication.

- -Dori Kornfeld

At 9:06 AM +0200 4/11/00, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
>The enclosed paragraph is considered irrelevant to the business of the GA,
>a personal attack, insulting and slanderous.
>
>The posting rights of "Jeff Williams" are hereby suspended for 4 week
starting
>today, lasting until May 9, 2000.
>
>Decisions of the GA list monitor can be appealed to the GA chair.
>
>                        Harald Tveit Alvestrand
>                            GA list monitor
>
>
>At 01:02 11.04.2000 -0700, Jeff Williams wrote:
>>Andy and all assembly members,
>>
>>  As you know
>>Jonathan Cohen as a known pedophile has a vested interest in shifting
>>attention from that fact, to denigrating others in a manner as public
>>as possible so as to keep his particular life style in the background.
>
>
>--
>Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
>[email-masked]
>
>--
>This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
>Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
>("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
>Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #56
***********************