Richard, > in my experience the hardest part of this whole process > has been to keep people in one place on one list. > > Originally there was one mailing list about new domain names, > now there are about two dozen. This fractialization is > counter producive and impedes forward movement. > > Moreso, the name of the list is less important than > the community the list is and represents. > Ah, but isnt this the domain name versus site usage issue all over again? You're talking to namesters, and are asking them to judge by substance? Forget it > 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. Separate lists is not in and of itself a Bad Thing; the risk is in not having a place to find out which separate lists are doing what. Imo, IFWP can serve the larger community better by staying tuned to the ICANN process as a whole. This may be why 156 folks are still here, of course, but it can also help 6 million other folks figure out where they fit into what is going on -- and I dont mean just which SO/ affinity group!. This is not to say that a mailing list cant have more than one thing going on. It does mean that individual members' exercising their own talents for *moderation is still a good value to uphold (ideal tho it may be!) -- which, in the very slightly longer run is a better course for net governance than splitting every little thing off into its own digital compartment and expecting some Board to simply tot up the results. kerry
