Removal from any public discussion list is a touchy subject. Perhaps, if
you are to implement such a policy, it should be with the review of two or
more individuals so as to avoid any accusation of personal vendetta.
Gene...
+++
Hi Richard J. Sexton, you wrote on 6/26/99 9:22:00 AM:
>At 08:47 AM 6/26/99 -0400, Bret A. Fausett wrote:
>>So, it seems to me a better idea that declaring
>>the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list as the regular expression
>>of the general assembly of the DNSO would be to
>>use the IFWP list for that purpose; it may take months
>>or perhaps even a year to get the dnso list to the size
>>the ifwp list.
>>
>>Are there any reasons why this shouldn't be done ?
>
>The only obstacles that I can see are:
>
> (1) ifwp is, as far as I know, completely unmoderated without any rules
>for participation, civility, etc. Participation would be enhanced by the
>addition of such rules;
>
>Ok, what if the [EMAIL PROTECTED] rules were adopted immediately ?
>
>The only rule I can find on www.dnso.org is
>
> "Anybody can subscribe to this list, however, the Names Council
> reserves the right to remove subscribers from the list -after a
> warning- if they use the list to slander or insult others."
>
>Which is probbaly something we should do anyway.
>
> (2) as far as I know, ifwp is not archived, and we'd want to start
>keeping copies of the general assembly list; and
>
>Yes, they are, http://lists.ifwp.org/archive
>
> (3) new participants may be confused by the name of the list.
>
>No problem, every [EMAIL PROTECTED] that exists is now set up
>@dnso.com, but goes to this list.
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>"They were of a mind to govern us and we were of a mind to govern
>ourselves."
+++++++++++++++++++++
I'm very happy @.HOME
Gene Marsh
president, anycastNET Incorporated
