Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #499
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST            Tuesday, May 29 2001            Volume 01 : Number 499

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

Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 22:30:30 -0400
From: "L Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] GA Credibility.

Well that would certainly keep the numbers down since no newbie 
would know who to ask for endorsement.

On 29 May 2001, at 11:59, Joop Teernstra wrote:

> At 21:47 28/05/2001 +0000, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> >Roeland,
> >
> >>....... What it also does is demonstrate, for the ICANN, that
> >>general transparency isn't ready for prime-time. It is the strongest
> >>argument against the @LArge that the ICANN has. A demonstration of chaos,
> >>if you will.
> >
> >
> >Any suggestion to change this?
> 
> Yes. I have made the (bold?) suggestion in the WG that membership of the GA
> (and especially posting rights on the list) should be endorsed by a minimum
> of 5 other individual GA members. (number of 5 is of course open to debate)
> This would make each poster to the GA list a sort of "representative" with
> accompanying rights and obligations.
> 
> 
> --Joop--
> Founder of the Cyberspace Association.
> Former bootstrap of the IDNO (www.idno.org)
> Developer of    The Polling Booth
> www.democracy.org.nz
> 
> 
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" 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: Mon, 28 May 2001 19:36:16 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Observations...

Hello Sotiris,

Monday, May 28, 2001, 6:22:01 PM, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:

> Actually, I voted onlist in favour of the first resolution (i.e. recognition of
> an IC in principle by the BoD), and I simply missed the call for the vote on the
> second resolution.  In any case,  I did not vote officially as I did not receive
> a ballot, and NOT because I was not interested in voting.

Did you register in the GA Voter Registry, Sotiris?

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh
mailto:[email-masked]
Owner, Userfriendly.com
Userfriendly.com Domains
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net

- --
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: Mon, 28 May 2001 22:34:57 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [ga] Observations...

Hello William,

on 5/28/01 9:47 PM, William X. Walsh at [email-masked] wrote:

> Hello Patrick,
> 
> Monday, May 28, 2001, 5:45:06 PM, Patrick Corliss wrote:
>> I realise that this is all a matter of public record but I do think it would
>> be better if we all avoided naming people whenever there is any suggestion
>> of disapproval.  The very fact of naming, without more, can cause severe
>> emotional disturbances amongst members.
> 
> Oh please. It was all public and documented on the web page.  There is
> no privacy issue here.

I agree with you on this one. There is no privacy issue here and
furthermore, those that claim to represent more than themselves should also
be willing to declare publicly how they voted.

Regards,
Joanna

- --
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, 29 May 2001 11:19:20 +0800
From: "McMeikan, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Individuals Constituency fund

Greetings all GA members.

This is just to advise the population of the general assembly about a fund
set up to take donations for the up coming Individuals constituency.

At least 75 members of this list would like to see the IC take off, going on
some of the comments I suspect that number is really higher.  If you want to
flame me for this please keep the noise off list, If you don't trust me to
hold this money for the purpose I've stated then don't send any money, this
post is for the info of those that will wish to support an IC.  I realise
that the IC is not yet in existence so some may not want to fund it until
they can see better where their money goes, this is fine by me.  I just
wanted those who are keen (like me ;) to be able to put some money up in
good faith.

This basis of creation of this fund is detailed here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wg-review/message/495

as always there were some questions to be answered, they can be seen here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wg-review/message/501

rather than ask 101 questions here read those links first, they should cover
it.  I do not claim this fund as the only way to get money into this cause,
but it may be an easy way for many and I would like everyone to have the
opportunity to make a donation.

Hopefully those links explain it enough for everyone, the brief summary is I
will hand over control of this account to the official IC once established,
failing an official established IC it will go towards that effort (IDNO
looking like the default should nothing else get together)

I also would not like this to be taken as an IC not needing funding via
ICANN, the IC will be much pressed for expenses as it will not have the big
money behind it as some of the other constituencies do, this is just to help
and there is very little money in it so far.

The main links pertaining to this fund as detailed in the messages
referenced above are detailed again below for your convenience.
If you know of other groups that might have an interest in or desire to
donate towards the IC please distribute this information to them.

The public balance http://www.e-gold.com/pub-bal.asp?pubid=313216
if any one wants to put some more money in
http://two-cents-worth.com/?313216
provides an easy way, just up the donation amount to what feels good to you
;)
If you do not have an e-gold account yet you can get a free one here 
https://www.e-gold.com/newacct/newaccount.asp?cid=313216 
You can find someone to convert your local currency to e-gold here 
http://www.e-gold.com/unsecure/links.htm
 or 
http://www.golddirectory.com/e-gold.htm

and the e-gold questions and answers page
http://www.e-gold.com/unsecure/qanda.html

If all this still does not help enough for you to put money in, mail me and
I will see how I can help.

	cya,	Andrew...
- --
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: Mon, 28 May 2001 23:21:30 -0400
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Observations...

Yes William, I registered in the GA Voter Registry during the elcetion for Chair.  I
did vote in the election, so I'm not exactly sure what happened this time round.

Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos

"William X. Walsh" wrote:

> Hello Sotiris,
>
> Monday, May 28, 2001, 6:22:01 PM, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
>
> > Actually, I voted onlist in favour of the first resolution (i.e. recognition of
> > an IC in principle by the BoD), and I simply missed the call for the vote on the
> > second resolution.  In any case,  I did not vote officially as I did not receive
> > a ballot, and NOT because I was not interested in voting.
>
> Did you register in the GA Voter Registry, Sotiris?
>
> --
> Best regards,
> William X Walsh
> mailto:[email-masked]
> Owner, Userfriendly.com
> Userfriendly.com Domains
> The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net

- --
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, 29 May 2001 00:05:48 -0400
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Amended Ballot

Just in case anyone had any doubts:
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02022.html

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
        Hermes Network, Inc.

- --
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: Mon, 28 May 2001 23:22:34 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Observations...

Danny and all assembly members,

Danny Younger wrote:

> Lessons to be learned from the voting process:
>
> As I review the names of those who actually voted on the GA ballot questions
> http://www.dnso.org/secretariat/b05fullrecord.html , I note that perhaps
> only 18 out of the 91 voters had posted any comments to the GA list in the
> last month.  Frankly, most of the voters are unknown to me.   Simply put, a
> full 80% of those voting do not actively participate on our GA list.  You
> may want to think about why this happens to be the case, and forward some
> suggestions as to how we may make improvements.

  This area has been discussed on several occasions before.  Conclusions drawn
from the previous Chair and Alt-Chair (Mystically appointed BTW) led to a
vote on some "List Rules" that was of questionable legitimacy.  As a result,
the active participants has dropped off significantly as a result.  I had warned

at that time that unless or until that problem was corrected, the interest
level in the DNSO GA-List participation would be limited as it is NOT
an open forum for which interested Parties "Stakeholders" can freely and
in an unfettered manner express their feelings, put forth their ideas, and
otherwise participate.  Hence participation has been limited to a small
subset of DNSO GA list members for fear of being banned or otherwise
ostracized in a manner that is harmful to them or their potential reparations.

>
>
> I was also quite dismayed to note that many our members who posted in the
> last month did not choose to vote:
> Appleby, Cade, Cochetti, Conant, Crispin, Crocker, Dassa, Dierker, Edelman,
> Fausett, Froomkin, Gaetano, Gardner, Greenwell, Harris, Hernand, Kelly,
> Kelsey, Ladi, Langdell, Levin, Marsh, Meyer, Mueller, Narra, Neuman,
> Portneuve, Roberts, Schneiders, Semich, Sheppard, Sotiropoulos, Stoen,
> Stubbs, Svensson.

  These names should not have been posted Danny.  It is exposing them to
potential ridicule that is unnecessary and harmful to them.  Please respect
the privacy if you would in the future.  It is particularly disgusting to me
that you should publish their names in this manner.  :(

>
>
> You may also want to think about why regular contributors have decided not
> to participate in a vote.

  I have as have many others that do participate and have posted their thoughts
on this subject area had you cared to check the archives more closely...

>
>
> You may wish to also note that over 70% of the members on our voting
> registry decided not to vote.  Perhaps we need to look at this "registry"
> list, and ask ourselves if we need a mechanism to keep it "current".

  Weather of not a registered voter votes is none of your or my business.
Such a mechanism would do nothing but become a divisive method for
limiting interested parties "Stakeholders" form ever becoming more active.

>
>
> If we are going to transform this Assembly into a body that is reasonably
> functional and representative, we may need to re-think our approach.  I am
> open to further suggestions, observations, and comments on how we can work
> to improve our Assembly.

  Suggestions have been put forth time and time again they are relatively the
same suggestions as well.  Please do a in-depth review of the archives and
glean this information for yourself, it should become clear to you what
would improve participation.

>
>
> --
> 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

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

- --
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: Mon, 28 May 2001 21:18:21 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Individuals Constituency fund

Hello Andrew,

While I appreciate the sentiment, the cost of the donations are rather
using that system.

If someone trustworthy (such as yourself) wants to setup a fund like
this, I'd consider http://www.kagi.com/

For donations of $20USD or more, the cost is 12.5%, and for larger
donations can be as low as 4.1%.

The kagi process fees are at:
http://faq.kagi.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/ViewFAQs.woa/4/wa/specificFAQ?FAQ=KagisTake

(No special account required for people to make a donation via Kagi
either)

Kagi started off as a shareware/software payment service, but offers
services for organization to receive donations, and more as well.
http://faq.kagi.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/ViewFAQs.woa/4/wa/specificFAQ?FAQ=Donations

Just an idea for you to consider.

Monday, May 28, 2001, 8:19:20 PM, McMeikan, Andrew wrote:

> Greetings all GA members.

> This is just to advise the population of the general assembly about a fund
> set up to take donations for the up coming Individuals constituency.

> At least 75 members of this list would like to see the IC take off, going on
> some of the comments I suspect that number is really higher.  If you want to
> flame me for this please keep the noise off list, If you don't trust me to
> hold this money for the purpose I've stated then don't send any money, this
> post is for the info of those that will wish to support an IC.  I realise
> that the IC is not yet in existence so some may not want to fund it until
> they can see better where their money goes, this is fine by me.  I just
> wanted those who are keen (like me ;) to be able to put some money up in
> good faith.

> This basis of creation of this fund is detailed here:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wg-review/message/495

> as always there were some questions to be answered, they can be seen here:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wg-review/message/501

> rather than ask 101 questions here read those links first, they should cover
> it.  I do not claim this fund as the only way to get money into this cause,
> but it may be an easy way for many and I would like everyone to have the
> opportunity to make a donation.

> Hopefully those links explain it enough for everyone, the brief summary is I
> will hand over control of this account to the official IC once established,
> failing an official established IC it will go towards that effort (IDNO
> looking like the default should nothing else get together)

> I also would not like this to be taken as an IC not needing funding via
> ICANN, the IC will be much pressed for expenses as it will not have the big
> money behind it as some of the other constituencies do, this is just to help
> and there is very little money in it so far.

> The main links pertaining to this fund as detailed in the messages
> referenced above are detailed again below for your convenience.
> If you know of other groups that might have an interest in or desire to
> donate towards the IC please distribute this information to them.

> The public balance http://www.e-gold.com/pub-bal.asp?pubid=313216
> if any one wants to put some more money in
> http://two-cents-worth.com/?313216
> provides an easy way, just up the donation amount to what feels good to you
> ;)
> If you do not have an e-gold account yet you can get a free one here 
> https://www.e-gold.com/newacct/newaccount.asp?cid=313216 
> You can find someone to convert your local currency to e-gold here 
> http://www.e-gold.com/unsecure/links.htm
>  or 
> http://www.golddirectory.com/e-gold.htm

> and the e-gold questions and answers page
> http://www.e-gold.com/unsecure/qanda.html

> If all this still does not help enough for you to put money in, mail me and
> I will see how I can help.

>         cya,    Andrew...
> --
> 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

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh
mailto:[email-masked]
Owner, Userfriendly.com
Userfriendly.com Domains
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net

- --
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: Mon, 28 May 2001 23:35:24 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Individuals Constituency fund

Andrew and all assembly members,

 We [INEGroup] would be happy to help here.  However a standard
account number with a Transit ID number needs to be provided.  The
e-gold account number is not such an account...

McMeikan, Andrew wrote:

> Greetings all GA members.
>
> This is just to advise the population of the general assembly about a fund
> set up to take donations for the up coming Individuals constituency.
>
> At least 75 members of this list would like to see the IC take off, going on
> some of the comments I suspect that number is really higher.  If you want to
> flame me for this please keep the noise off list, If you don't trust me to
> hold this money for the purpose I've stated then don't send any money, this
> post is for the info of those that will wish to support an IC.  I realise
> that the IC is not yet in existence so some may not want to fund it until
> they can see better where their money goes, this is fine by me.  I just
> wanted those who are keen (like me ;) to be able to put some money up in
> good faith.
>
> This basis of creation of this fund is detailed here:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wg-review/message/495
>
> as always there were some questions to be answered, they can be seen here:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wg-review/message/501
>
> rather than ask 101 questions here read those links first, they should cover
> it.  I do not claim this fund as the only way to get money into this cause,
> but it may be an easy way for many and I would like everyone to have the
> opportunity to make a donation.
>
> Hopefully those links explain it enough for everyone, the brief summary is I
> will hand over control of this account to the official IC once established,
> failing an official established IC it will go towards that effort (IDNO
> looking like the default should nothing else get together)
>
> I also would not like this to be taken as an IC not needing funding via
> ICANN, the IC will be much pressed for expenses as it will not have the big
> money behind it as some of the other constituencies do, this is just to help
> and there is very little money in it so far.
>
> The main links pertaining to this fund as detailed in the messages
> referenced above are detailed again below for your convenience.
> If you know of other groups that might have an interest in or desire to
> donate towards the IC please distribute this information to them.
>
> The public balance http://www.e-gold.com/pub-bal.asp?pubid=313216
> if any one wants to put some more money in
> http://two-cents-worth.com/?313216
> provides an easy way, just up the donation amount to what feels good to you
> ;)
> If you do not have an e-gold account yet you can get a free one here
> https://www.e-gold.com/newacct/newaccount.asp?cid=313216
> You can find someone to convert your local currency to e-gold here
> http://www.e-gold.com/unsecure/links.htm
>  or
> http://www.golddirectory.com/e-gold.htm
>
> and the e-gold questions and answers page
> http://www.e-gold.com/unsecure/qanda.html
>
> If all this still does not help enough for you to put money in, mail me and
> I will see how I can help.
>
>         cya,    Andrew...
> --
> 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

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

- --
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, 29 May 2001 08:05:03 +0200 (MET DST)
From: DNSO Secretariat <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Observations... - Voting Registry

| 
| From [email-masked] Tue May 29 03:25 MET 2001
| Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
| Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 21:22:01 -0400
| From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
| To: Danny Younger <[email-masked]>
| CC: [email-masked]
| Subject: Re: [ga] Observations...
| 
| Actually, I voted onlist in favour of the first resolution (i.e. recognition of
| an IC in principle by the BoD), and I simply missed the call for the vote on the
| second resolution.  In any case,  I did not vote officially as I did not receive
| a ballot, and NOT because I was not interested in voting.
| 
| Sincerely,
| 
| Sotiris Sotiropoulos
| 
| Danny Younger wrote:
| <snip>
| 

Dear Sotiris Sotiropoulos,

The logs indicate your ballot sent and delivered to your site.

DNSO Secretariat

- --
May 21 22:05:17 dnso sendmail[9516]: WAA09516: from=[email-masked], size=2040,
class=0, pri=32040, nrcpts=1, msgid=<[email-masked]>, relay
=secretariat@localhost
May 21 22:05:19 dnso sendmail[9518]: WAA09516: to=[email-masked], del
ay=00:00:02, xdelay=00:00:02, mailer=esmtp, relay=hermesnetwork.com. [139.142.20
2.6], stat=Sent (2.0.0 f4LK5Fm09135 Message accepted for delivery)
- --

- --
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, 29 May 2001 14:28:50 +0800
From: "erica roberts" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] NCtelecon 9 May 2001, minutes

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_0034_01C0E84B.ADB0A4C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Since my comment on the NC re the need to establish procedures for the
creation of email lists has been reported on this list (see below), I want
to make a point of clarification.

I have heard a lot of comment on this list about the time it took to set up
new email lists.  While is  true that, IF the tech person is given all the
relevant information relating to list rules and administration,  it is a
relatively quick and simple matter to create a new list.  However, a lot of
time can be wasted if the relevant information relating to list rules (if
any) and admin is not provided and needs to be collected.  Procedures are
needed so that people requiring the creation of new lists are aware of the
information they should provide to the tech responsible for creating new
lists and not put the onus on the Secretariat or tech support to spend time
chasing up the information.

erica
  -----Original Message-----
  From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Jefsey
Morfin
  Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 4:51 AM
  To: [email-masked]
  Subject: Re: [ga] NCtelecon 9 May 2001, minutes

  Doom, doom, doom, DOOM.

  [erica]
   On 20:58 28/05/01, DNSO Secretariat said:

        Ph. Sheppard expressed some concern as to process leading to the
newly
         created GA mailing lists, set up on GA Chair request. The lists
were
         established before the NC had a chance to approve them. He felt NC
         approval was needed as there is a cost implication (set up
represented
         20 hours of DNSO secretariat work and there is around 2 hours for
daily
         maintenance). He proposed one practical cost saving would be
         closure on the under-used GA open list which duplicates the
         normal GA list. NC members agreed and P.Sheppard will talk with
         the GA chair on this.

  Well done!   BTW no vote ...

        E. Roberts agreed with the concern and pointed out that no
information
         was given prior to a setting up of the lists as to their chair or
         moderator. She asked for the process to be clarified.

  Dear Erica. May be she might give a local call to Patrick?

  Deep thanks to everyone involved ....

- ------=_NextPart_000_0034_01C0E84B.ADB0A4C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.100" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D230220906-29052001>Since=20
my comment on the NC re the need to establish procedures for the =
creation of=20
email lists has been reported on this list (see below), I want to make a =
point=20
of clarification.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D230220906-29052001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D230220906-29052001>I have=20
heard a lot of comment on this list about the time it took to set up new =
email=20
lists.&nbsp; While is&nbsp; true&nbsp;that, IF the tech person is given =
all the=20
relevant information relating to list rules and administration,&nbsp; it =
is a=20
relatively quick and simple matter to create a new list.&nbsp; However, =
a lot of=20
time can be wasted if the relevant information relating to list rules =
(if any)=20
and admin&nbsp;is not provided and needs to be collected.&nbsp; =
Procedures are=20
needed so that people requiring the creation of new lists are aware of =
the=20
information they should provide to the tech responsible for creating new =
lists=20
and not put the onus on the Secretariat or tech support to spend time =
chasing up=20
the information.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D230220906-29052001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D230220906-29052001>erica&nbsp; </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> [email-masked]=20
  [mailto:[email-masked]]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Jefsey =
Morfin<BR><B>Sent:</B>=20
  Tuesday, May 29, 2001 4:51 AM<BR><B>To:</B> =
[email-masked]<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re:=20
  [ga] NCtelecon 9 May 2001, minutes<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>Doom, doom, doom, DOOM.<BR><BR><BR><SPAN =
class=3D230220906-29052001><FONT=20
  face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>[erica]&nbsp;</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
  <DIV><SPAN class=3D230220906-29052001>&nbsp;</SPAN>On 20:58 28/05/01, =
DNSO=20
  Secretariat said:<BR></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE class=3Dcite cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Ph. =
Sheppard=20
    expressed some concern as to process leading to the=20
    newly<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; created GA mailing lists, set up =
on GA=20
    Chair request. The lists were<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
established before=20
    the NC had a chance to approve them. He felt =
NC<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
    approval was needed as there is a cost implication (set up=20
    represented<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 20 hours of DNSO secretariat =
work=20
    and there is around 2 hours for daily<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
    maintenance).<B> He proposed one practical cost saving would be=20
    <BR></B>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <B>closure on the under-used GA =
open list=20
    which duplicates the <BR></B>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <B>normal GA =
list.</B>=20
    NC members agreed and P.Sheppard will talk with =
<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
    the GA chair on this.</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Well done!&nbsp;&nbsp; BTW no =
vote ...=20
  <BR><BR>
  <BLOCKQUOTE class=3Dcite cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; E. =
Roberts agreed=20
    with the concern and pointed out that no=20
    information<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; was given prior to a setting =
up of=20
    the lists as to their chair or<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
moderator. She=20
    asked for the process to be clarified.</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Dear Erica. =
May be she=20
  might give a local call to Patrick?&nbsp; <BR><BR>Deep thanks to =
everyone=20
  involved .... <BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_0034_01C0E84B.ADB0A4C0--

- --
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, 29 May 2001 00:26:49 -0700
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] NCtelecon 9 May 2001, minutes

> From: erica roberts [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 11:29 PM
> 
> Since my comment on the NC re the need to establish procedures for the
creation of email lists > has been reported on this list (see below), I want
to make a point of clarification.
> 
> I have heard a lot of comment on this list about the time it took to set
up new email lists.  
> While is  true that, IF the tech person is given all the relevant
information relating to list > rules and administration,  it is a relatively
quick and simple matter to create a new list.  

> However, a lot of time can be wasted if the relevant information relating
to list rules (if 
> any) and admin is not provided and needs to be collected.  Procedures are
needed so that 
> people requiring the creation of new lists are aware of the information
they should provide
> to the tech responsible for creating new lists and not put the onus on the
Secretariat 
> or tech support to spend time chasing up the information.

I thought that this process problem was solved some time ago. Nevertheless,
it is a one-time expense and should not be factored into cost projections
going forward.

BTW, I just had to hand quote the above message. HTML is horrible. Please
send plain-text.
- --
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, 29 May 2001 19:05:54 +1000
From: "Dassa" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Re[2]: [ga] Observations...

|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: [email-masked] On Behalf Of Joanna Lane
|> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 12:35 PM
|> To: William X. Walsh
|> Cc: [ga]
|> Subject: Re: Re[2]: [ga] Observations...
|>
|>
|> Hello William,
|>
|> on 5/28/01 9:47 PM, William X. Walsh at [email-masked] wrote:
|>
|> > Hello Patrick,
|> >
|> > Monday, May 28, 2001, 5:45:06 PM, Patrick Corliss wrote:
|> >> I realise that this is all a matter of public record but I  do think
it would
|> >> be better if we all avoided naming people whenever there is any
suggestion
|> >> of disapproval.  The very fact of naming, without more, can cause
severe
|> >> emotional disturbances amongst members.
|> >
|> > Oh please. It was all public and documented on the web page.  There is
|> > no privacy issue here.
|>
|>
|> I agree with you on this one. There is no privacy issue here and
|> furthermore, those that claim to represent more than themselves
|> should also be willing to declare publicly how they voted.

I think the point Patrick was raising was not privacy related but to do
with the suggestion of disapproval and the possibility the named people
would be seen as in the "wrong" from the way the post was worded.  I tend
to agree and think a link to the URL with the information would have been
apropriate, with a follow up to try and find the reasons, either in public
or private.  I had a valid reason for not having voted.  I did not
appreciate the tone of disapproval from the Chair in the post,
unintentional as it may have been.

Far as my understanding goes, we are all individuals in the GA and it is
one voice, one vote.  Nor do I see any need to justify voting after the
event.  This may come from my regional setting where voting is anonymous
but compulsory.  Besides, if the majority of voters have not voiced an
opinion on the list, I doubt any attempts to solicit reasons for their
voting would be productive.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.

- --
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, 29 May 2001 06:18:47 -0400
From: "Danny Younger" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re:  Observations

Jeff Williams writes that as a result of "a vote on some "List Rules" that
was of questionable legitimacy... the active participants has dropped off
significantly as a result."

I would disagree with this assessment.  In my conversations with others that
do not participate on our list, the general sentiment seems to be, "Why
should I expose myself to the vitriolic attacks that run rampant on the GA
list?"

Part of the problem is that in knowing who is the author of any particular
message, we have those among us who revel in the prospect of attacking the
messenger.   Eliminating the list rules (as some would advocate), will not
solve this problem; neither will more rigid rules or more rigorous
enforcement (as those who have a predilection for such behavior will
continue to find ways to defeat the system).

Perhaps the solution lies in stripping the message header so that author's
identity is not revealed.  In this manner, ideas can only be attacked on the
basis of "content" or "merit".    Of course, any author may choose to add
his/her name to a message posted in the body of the text.

Some will argue that as we are the representatives of the Internet
Community, our names should be on record whenever we post a message.  If
this were true, then equally I would expect to know how our representatives
voted on any particular issue.   As the latter is not currently true, why
should the former be required?

There is a value in having a mechanism that allows for anonymous postings.

On the other hand, perhaps we should know how each individual votes on an
issue, especially if only 91 of us are in fact representing the 29,000,000+
registered domains.  Perhaps our voting registry should be asking for more
details with respect to affiliations; perhaps a declaration of interests
would be in order?

If in fact we decide that it is wise to note how any representative votes,
perhaps our ballot rules should be changed to allow for the possibility of
abstentions, as Joanna rightly noted.

Also, if over 80% of those who cast their votes are not regular participants
on the GA list, perhaps we need to quickly get to work on defining our own
internal procedures for bringing a motion to the floor so that the "silent
majority" will have the opportunity to participate more often.   As each
motion should be followed by a necessary span of time to allow for proper
debate, perhaps a schedule could be devised to accommodate this process.
Those of you interested in pursuing such issues are invited to take up this
discussion on the ga-rules list.

- --
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, 29 May 2001 17:30:26 +1200
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Individuals Constituency fund

At 11:19 29/05/01 +0800, McMeikan, Andrew wrote:
>Greetings all GA members.
>
>This is just to advise the population of the general assembly about a fund
>set up to take donations for the up coming Individuals constituency.

This is a very commendable initiative.  Thank you , Andrew.
Actually, similar ways were discussed in the NCDNHC meeting in Melbourne to 
help orgs from developing countries meet their DNSO dues so their they 
would not lose their voting rights.

- --Joop--
Founder of the Cyberspace Association.
Former bootstrap of the IDNO (www.idno.org)
Developer of    The Polling Booth
www.democracy.org.nz

- --
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 #499
************************