I agree with Jonh because his words have sense. On the other side, I do not understand what is the motivation of this proposal. Could someone explain to me? Carlos Dionisio Aguirre abogado - Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina - *54-351-424-2123 / 423-5423 www.sitioderecho.com.ar www.densi.com.ar

Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 20:36:37 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com To: franck.martin@gmail.com CC: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] Motion for ALAC board

...

Resolution: ALAC will request ICANN to create a mailing list reserved to the board members of ALS and only the board members of ALS.

How in the world do you plan to tell who's on an ALS board and who isn't?

For that matter, why do you think that every ALS even has a board?

Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor "More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.

_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org

_________________________________________________________________ Ingresá ya a MSN Deportes y enterate de las últimas novedades del mundo deportivo. http://msn.foxsports.com/fslasc/

Thomas and all my friends, My sentiments exactly! Oh please indeed! >:/ Thomas Roessler wrote:

On 2008-03-04 20:36:37 -0500, John Levine wrote:

...

...

Resolution: ALAC will request ICANN to create a mailing list reserved to the board members of ALS and only the board members of ALS.

...

How in the world do you plan to tell who's on an ALS board and who isn't?

...

For that matter, why do you think that every ALS even has a board?

Or, for that matter, that an ALS is wants to be represented in the ICANN context by a board member?

Oh please.

-- Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>

_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org

Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

I believe these rules are enough to regulate the lists and to keep them effective. I would suggest a limited number of email for person by day or week. Such limit will encourage people think a little more about what they will write in order to be more objective. Reducing the amount of e mails in our box will also allow people pay more attention to each email received. This is a voluntary job, hence, we need time to work in our life and at same time keep up to date and contribute with the ALAC. The amount of email we are receiving now doesn’t allow us to pay the needed attention to each message. Best, Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Alameda Santos 1470 #1407 Tel - +55113266.6253 Mob- +55118181.1464 vanda@uol.com.br P Before print think about the Environment "The information contained in this message - and attached files - is restricted, and its confidentiality protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and notify the sender immediately. Please be advised that the improper use of the aforementioned information will create grounds for legal action." "As informações existentes nesta mensagem e nos arquivos anexados são para uso restrito, com sigilo protegido por lei. Caso não seja o destinatário, favor apagar esta mensagem e notificar o remetente. O uso impróprio das informações desta mensagem será tratado conforme a legislação em vigor." _____ De: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] Em nome de Nick Ashton-Hart Enviada em: quarta-feira, 5 de março de 2008 05:31 Para: At-Large Worldwide Assunto: [At-Large] List Posting Behaviour / Code of Conduct Dear All: Since there are many members of this list who are newer participants, and as requested, I reproduce below the relevant part of the At-Large Advisory Committee Rules of Procedure related to mailing list behaviour and postings. Rule 22 - Code of Conduct 22.1 The ALAC discussion lists and its other online collaborative spaces serve two purposes. They are where we discuss ICANN-related policy issues and attend to administrative tasks related to the management of ALAC. 22.2 Content that is acceptable in our online collaborative spaces is defined as: 22.3 Discussion on ICANN-related policy issues, 22.4 Discussion of ALAC administrative matters, 22.5 Announcements of conferences, events, or activities related to ICANN matters. 22.6 Inappropriate postings include: 22.7 Unsolicited bulk e-mail, 22.8 Discussion of subjects unrelated to ICANN policy, meetings, activities, or technical concerns, 22.9 Unprofessional commentary, regardless of the general subject, 22.10 Postings libellous being used to abuse, harass, stalk, or threaten others, 22.11 Postings that are, knowingly false, ad-hominem, or misrepresents another person, 22.12 Postings that violate an obligation of confidentiality, 22.13 Postings that violate the privacy of others, 22.14 Announcements of conferences, events, or activities that are not related to ICANN matters. 22.15 The ALAC Chair is empowered to suspend or restrict a person's posting rights when the content that person has posted is inappropriate and represents a pattern of abuse. The Chair defines and determines inappropriate content on a case-by-case basis. Our definitions are not limited to this list. If the Chair suspends posting rights or deletes a comment or link, he will say so and explain why. When determining the duration of the suspension, the Chair is required to take into account the overall nature of the postings by an individual and whether particular postings are an aberration or typical. 22.16 Occasionally, a participant may engage in what amounts to a "denial-of-service" attack to disrupt the consensus-driven process. Typically, these attacks are made by repeatedly posting messages that are off-topic, inflammatory, or otherwise counter-productive, and the Chair may choose to revoke the participant's posting rights. In contrast, good faith disagreement is a healthy part of the consensus-driven process. For example, if the group is unable to reach consensus, this is an acceptable, albeit unfortunate, outcome; however, if that group fails to achieve consensus because it is being continuously disrupted, then the disruption constitutes an abuse of the consensus-driven process. Interactions of this type are fundamentally different from "the lone voice of dissent" in which a participant expresses a view that is discussed but does not achieve consensus. In other words, individual bad faith should not trump community goodwill. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director for At-Large Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Main Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 (79) 595 54-68 email: nick.ashton-hart@icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

Nick and all my friends, There are a couple on your list that are of s subjective nature and as such cannot be always reasonably determined as valid in all circumstances in any given point in time. Of your below list they are: 22.10 Postings libelous being used to abuse, harass, stalk, or threaten others, 22.11 Postings that are, knowingly false, ad-hominem, or misrepresents another person, Legal proof(s) is/are required to substantiate these two above *suggested* Inappropriate sort of postings. However I fully agree that these two *suggested* as inappropriate sorts of postings should never be recognized as expectable. -misrepresentation is very difficult to prove or even recognize by others and as such is difficult if not nearly impossible to address in any Email list fora. -stalking, cannot be considered reasonable on and Email list unless such is significantly obvious and specifically directed at an individual or individuals. ad-hominem- is strictly subjective in most contexts. Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:

Dear All:

Since there are many members of this list who are newer participants, and as requested, I reproduce below the relevant part of the At-Large Advisory Committee Rules of Procedure related to mailing list behaviour and postings.

Rule 22 - Code of Conduct 22.1 The ALAC discussion lists and its other online collaborative spaces serve two purposes. They are where we discuss ICANN-related policy issues and attend to administrative tasks related to the management of ALAC. 22.2 Content that is acceptable in our online collaborative spaces is defined as: 22.3 Discussion on ICANN-related policy issues, 22.4 Discussion of ALAC administrative matters, 22.5 Announcements of conferences, events, or activities related to ICANN matters. 22.6 Inappropriate postings include: 22.7 Unsolicited bulk e-mail, 22.8 Discussion of subjects unrelated to ICANN policy, meetings, activities, or technical concerns, 22.9 Unprofessional commentary, regardless of the general subject, 22.10 Postings libellous being used to abuse, harass, stalk, or threaten others, 22.11 Postings that are, knowingly false, ad-hominem, or misrepresents another person, 22.12 Postings that violate an obligation of confidentiality, 22.13 Postings that violate the privacy of others, 22.14 Announcements of conferences, events, or activities that are not related to ICANN matters. 22.15 The ALAC Chair is empowered to suspend or restrict a person's posting rights when the content that person has posted is inappropriate and represents a pattern of abuse. The Chair defines and determines inappropriate content on a case-by-case basis. Our definitions are not limited to this list. If the Chair suspends posting rights or deletes a comment or link, he will say so and explain why. When determining the duration of the suspension, the Chair is required to take into account the overall nature of the postings by an individual and whether particular postings are an aberration or typical. 22.16 Occasionally, a participant may engage in what amounts to a "denial-of-service" attack to disrupt the consensus-driven process. Typically, these attacks are made by repeatedly posting messages that are off-topic, inflammatory, or otherwise counter-productive, and the Chair may choose to revoke the participant's posting rights. In contrast, good faith disagreement is a healthy part of the consensus-driven process. For example, if the group is unable to reach consensus, this is an acceptable, albeit unfortunate, outcome; however, if that group fails to achieve consensus because it is being continuously disrupted, then the disruption constitutes an abuse of the consensus-driven process. Interactions of this type are fundamentally different from "the lone voice of dissent" in which a participant expresses a view that is discussed but does not achieve consensus. In other words, individual bad faith should not trump community goodwill.

--

Regards,

Nick Ashton-Hart Director for At-Large Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Main Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 (79) 595 54-68 email: nick.ashton-hart@icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio:https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

---------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________

Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

Franck Martin wrote:

The current status quo is not acceptable, that's all. time for decisions.

Actually, the status quo has become very acceptable for me since I invested about 10 minutes to set up filters on my email reader; it's actually quite easy. Personally I prefer reader-end controls over centrally-administered restrictions. This is mainly because not everyone shares the same threshold of what constitutes abuse. Reader-based filters can be fine tuned to personal preferences in a way that list-wide moderation or blockage cannot. I would note that some of the would-be targets of such controls have not engaged in personal abuse or offensive language; codes of conduct that govern civility of speech have not been broken. In using reader-based filters I simply exploit a fundamental fact; having the right to speak freely does not obligate anyone to listen. Email filters implement your desire to listen (or not) to certain topics or speakers, without requiring anything to be done at the source. Furthermore, this solution also allows (indeed requires) some level of personal responsibility for implementing controls, rather than just delegating the problem onto someone else. This alone is a reason to prefer the localized solution. - Evan

I believe that people need to learn to behave themselves, not only according to some rules of conduct but according to the nature of being respectful with other list members It in not a matter of a new list but of respect José Ovidio Salgueiro A. jsalgueiro@cantv.net -----Mensaje original----- De: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de Bret Fausett Enviado el: miércoles, 05 de marzo de 2008 09:50 a.m. Para: ALAC Asunto: Re: [At-Large] Motion for ALAC board On Mar 4, 2008, at 8:26 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:

This is mainly because not everyone shares the same threshold of what constitutes abuse.

But there is some conduct that everyone would consider abuse and that, objectively, violates the ALAC Code of Conduct in Rule 22. -- Bret _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org

*To most of the postings off list: All that is needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.*(Edmund Burke) -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Franck Martin franck.martin@gmail.com http://www.peachymango.org/ "Toute connaissance est une réponse à une question" G. Bachelard

Jeffrey and all my friends, My friends, you understand what was just been said about what's not said, in this very saying e-mail? Jeffrey, you are a native English speaker, right? On 07/03/2008, Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

José and all my friends,

I agree fully. But one must remember, respect is earned, not given. Everyone has their own set of rules of conduct, many of which are *intercompatable*, and some which are not. Respecting those differences, however great or slight, is a matter of familiarity, competence, knowledge base, and often times tolerance.

I like to believe that I am a very tolerant person. That however doesn't mean that I am going to go along to bet along nor do I expect same from anyone else. It also doesn't mean I am not going to express my or our members positions, ideas, or thoughts on any matter that concerns them.

From what I am reading, seems to me there is an effort of a few that desire to silence others who's opinion is different from those same few, rather than respecting those differences or at least recognizing same and as a result of such, desires to silence those views for their own narrow reasons. If so, such is reprehensible at best. And as such, cannot possibly be representative of the majority of participating users @large to, or of, the ALAC and/or ICANN.

-- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Franck Martin franck.martin@gmail.com http://www.peachymango.org/ "Toute connaissance est une réponse à une question" G. Bachelard

Evan and all my friends, This is actually pretty good reasoning Evan has articulated. Yet it is often unwise to filter strictly by Email address or even worse, by Domain name. However many of our members do filter by Domain name simply because they receive too much spam from certain Email providers or even ISP's these days because the the abuse Email address where complaints are suppose to be sent, often are effectively non-functional. Presently I filter over 500 Domain names, much to my own displeasure. Yet I find it necessary in forder to stop or curtail phishing attempts and general spam. Evan Leibovitch wrote:

Franck Martin wrote:

...

The current status quo is not acceptable, that's all. time for decisions.

Actually, the status quo has become very acceptable for me since I invested about 10 minutes to set up filters on my email reader; it's actually quite easy.

Personally I prefer reader-end controls over centrally-administered restrictions. This is mainly because not everyone shares the same threshold of what constitutes abuse. Reader-based filters can be fine tuned to personal preferences in a way that list-wide moderation or blockage cannot.

I would note that some of the would-be targets of such controls have not engaged in personal abuse or offensive language; codes of conduct that govern civility of speech have not been broken.

In using reader-based filters I simply exploit a fundamental fact; having the right to speak freely does not obligate anyone to listen. Email filters implement your desire to listen (or not) to certain topics or speakers, without requiring anything to be done at the source.

Furthermore, this solution also allows (indeed requires) some level of personal responsibility for implementing controls, rather than just delegating the problem onto someone else. This alone is a reason to prefer the localized solution.

- Evan

Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

Roberto and all my friends, Define "Cross Posting". CC'ing is decidedly NOT cross posting. Trimming CC's is a good idea in order to not waste band width. However is the subject area in any post is of interests to multiple Email list forums, than CC'ing is definitely appropriate as well as beneficial to those that may not be on those respective list forums accordingly. I would assume that ICANN would want to maximize any benifit to any and all users to the greatest extent possible. Or am I mistaken on that? As a board member now Roberto, I would assume this would be a high priority with you and any other ICANN Board member accordingly. It certainly has been a tradition of the Internet! Roberto Gaetano wrote:

I would think that this is not a good idea. I acknowledge that we might have a problem, but we should try to fix the problem without creating additional overhead and ultimately risking a bigger mess. Every community that I know has rules, and the ALAC is no exception. We need to set them and enforce them. No cross posting, specifically between ALAC and GA, would be already a good starting point. A posting limit could be another one. Monitoring off-topic posts a third one, although more resource-demanding and potentially controversial. In all cases sanctions should be etablished and enforced. Cheers, Roberto

------------------------------------------------------------- From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Franck Martin Sent: Wednesday, 05 March 2008 00:48 To: ALAC Subject: [At-Large] Motion for ALAC board

I propose the following resolution for the ALAC board.

Resolution: ALAC will request ICANN to create a mailing list reserved to the board members of ALS and only the board members of ALS.

-- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Franck Martin franck.martin@gmail.com http://www.peachymango.org/ "Toute connaissance est une réponse à une question" G. Bachelard

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

Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

Just to say that we need to maintain this mailing but we need also to create a new one with only "ALS representative". I think that each ALS has minimum one representative even if they are not legally constituted. Actually some persons are registered to the actual list only to obtain organizational and official informations about the ALS without being involved in the discussions. So its not question of rules or behavior but its question of organizing mailing-list depending on information circulating on the mailing list. Khaled KOUBAA wrote:

+1

Franck Martin wrote:

...

I propose the following resolution for the ALAC board.

Resolution: ALAC will request ICANN to create a mailing list reserved to the board members of ALS and only the board members of ALS.

-- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Franck Martin franck.martin@gmail.com <mailto:franck.martin@gmail.com> http://www.peachymango.org/ "Toute connaissance est une réponse à une question" G. Bachelard ------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org

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

_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org

Of course you do realise that some countries don't have an ALS. Don't you? So let's see if I understand the issue .... There's some disruption on a mailing list. Possibly caused by one or two people. Instead of dealing with it some people want another list setup, but want a committee to make a decision for this to happen? And then people wonder why ICANN has no teeth *sigh* -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ Tel. 1850 929 929 Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845

Michele and all my friends, There is no disruption of any list. There is a disagreement amongst list members or issues, what are important issues amongst users, and how those issues should be discussed, unless of course one views disagreement as disruption, a skewed view to be sure! The fact that Ireland does not have an ALS is of their own users organizations and individual users own choice. Setting up yet another list determined by unelected members of some committee seems divisive in that such seems to seek to eliminate transparency, open participation, and accountability accordingly. That is specifically against the MOU and has even broader negative implications for users everywhere. I suppose that prioritizing users issues can be helpful. If so, than getting a quantitative idea as to which issues are at what level of priority would seem to be a good starting point. The problem is with doing so is that there are so many now, and more seemingly coming nearly every day. Second problem is that of education, which is to say that many user problems can be addressed or actually solved by users themselves, but the knowledge as to how to do so is not readily known. Three examples: Spam, IDtheft and Phishing Solutions or addressing these three problems I have already expressed/provided to the ALAC list members. They are: ID Theft reporting: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/02/idtheft.shtm which provides for good information regarding this user problem. Reporting spam to: spam@uce.gov and where available to their providers problem/abuse reporting machinisim. Phishing: Reporting Phishing attempts to http://www.antiphishing.org/report_phishing.html and follow the instructions... and/or to: http://www.us-cert.gov/nav/report_phishing.html and other incident reporting at: https://forms.us-cert.gov/report/ Other User reported problems are Domain Name Tasting/Frontrunning being perpetrated by Registries/Registrars where there is no good means currently by which to address this problem via ICANN and ICANN seemingly doesn't desire to be very forthcoming in actually eliminating this problem even though policy and technical means and methods are available and have been elaborated upon. Hence law suits have ensued against Network Solutions and ICANN accordingly. Some very few ALAC global members seem to take some offense personally to legal remedies being sought. More are very likely to be sought in the near future or enjoining of current class action suits currently filed may be eminent, which again some ALAC members view as offensive/abusive for whatever reasons yet fully elaborated upon, they have. Frankly, and by rule of law, taking such as offensive or abusive is specifically inproper/inappropriate at a minimum, and terribly skewed at worst and perhaps have legal remedies under restraint of trade laws, regulations, and trade agreement provisions already in place a la NAFTA, GATT, ect... Michele Neylon wrote:

Of course you do realise that some countries don't have an ALS. Don't you?

So let's see if I understand the issue ....

There's some disruption on a mailing list. Possibly caused by one or two people.

Instead of dealing with it some people want another list setup, but want a committee to make a decision for this to happen?

And then people wonder why ICANN has no teeth

*sigh*

-- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ Tel. 1850 929 929 Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845

Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

I have to agree with Jacqueline on this one. Also, my filtering doesn't seem to be working as well as Evan's. As there have now been multiple requests to the board to deal with this problem, I do hope that *some* action is taken soon. Darlene Darlene A. Thompson Community Access Program Administrator Nunavut Department of Education/N-CAP c/o P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 dthompson@gov.nu.ca -----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jacqueline A. Morris Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 6:51 AM To: JFC Morfin Cc: ALAC Subject: Re: [At-Large] Motion for ALAC board From the ALS listing on alac.icann.org, INEGroup is not an accredited ALS. There were regional ALS-only lists created previously, but most were discontinued last year by request, as the number of mailing lists was huge and, some felt, unmanageable. The problem with client-side monitoring as Evan suggests is bandwidth for people in locations with low and expensive bandwidth. I can set up all sorts of rules on my computer, but then I still have to download the mail before it gets to implement those rules. Same problem if I want to implement rules on my server (if my server is locally hosted, and if I even have access to so do) The ALAC rules exist and the Chair has indicated that it will be considered, so I look forward to the ALAC decision, and hopefully a more streamlined and productive list with fewer distractions. My $0.02 Jacqueline JFC Morfin wrote:

At 15:17 05/03/2008, Khaled KOUBAA wrote:

...

Just to say that we need to maintain this mailing but we need also to create a new one with only "ALS representative". I think that each ALS has minimum one representative even if they are not legally constituted. Actually some persons are registered to the actual list only to obtain organizational and official informations about the ALS without being involved in the discussions. So its not question of rules or behavior but its question of organizing mailing-list depending on information circulating on the mailing list.

+1 this is why I advocate that the ALSrep/internal list includes - all the chairs of the ALS - including the one under probe - ALS members under the responsibility and monitoring of the registered ALS. This does not touch the current one we can call "external" or "public". jfc

_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org

http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann .org

At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org

_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann .org At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org

Anyone who harboured the illusion that ALAC has stopped obsessing with process, has had that illusion quickly shattered by this endless mailing list thread about mailing lists. Its volume has easily outpaced anything to do with policy or real needs. If you as a reader are fed up with certain message senders, stop reading their messages. (I for one will now start filtering this whole thread, not just certain posters.) If the Chair is satisfied that current guidelines are being violated, by all means implement appropriate moderation or blocking. Said measure, if controversial, can be debated and put to rest at the next ALAC meeting. What is NOT needed are new lists, new rules for the existing lists, or endless debate about them. Even for volunteers, our time has value. - Evan

Dear Evan, IMHO the reason why this kind of topic leads to important threads is that they precisely belong to our domain of expertise. In other domains like cc/gTLD management, or DNS architecture @large people are obervers and users. In the domain of human interrelations we are experts because we are directly concerned. This is the way IETF has started: the @large of the time who were machine admins started organizing together. The ultimate purpose of the Internet is to smartly support our international relations. There are three major topics involved at that layer: - how the underlaying layers (telecoms and datacoms: the internet) behave. - how do we optimaly relate together. The current solutions (mail, webdev, web services, wikis, blogs, spam, etc.) are not optimal yet. - how do we intergovern all that. We focus on this, but without mastering the two other topics we will stay non-productive be ignorance and practical incapacity. We currently face a simple and common problem: there always are different perceptions of their relational spacew by their members. How to best design its technical support, best pratices and control to permit all of them to adjust? This is not an easy task and if does concern everyone, many like you can be quickly fed-up. This is why, years ago the DNSO (under Roberto if I am correct) tried to address this problem. Several of us worked together at the DNSO/WG-Review, and produced some results [was Danny not the reporter?] (I personally enforced some of them in other environments), but no one developed the corresponding tool or produced the corresponding RFC. There are some interesting softwares now we could take also advantage from, and other experiences. The main problem is that such a WG should associate @large and techies. This is from experience quite an impossible requirement, as the IETF demonstrates it everyday. jfc

You are a "member of the ALAC"??? In what capacity? What is your title? This is certainly news to me. And, I'm sorry, but we aren't just looking at a few disgruntled parties but an entire community that is tired of your multiple postings, cross postings, and off-topic postings. When one person is responsible for over 40% of the postings on one list then there is obviously a problem. I, too, am not your friend and wish to see this cease. If you cannot moderate yourself, then accept moderation from someone else. Darlene Darlene A. Thompson Community Access Program Administrator Nunavut Department of Education/N-CAP c/o P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 dthompson@gov.nu.ca -----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jeffrey A. Williams Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 2:25 PM To: John Levine Cc: ALAC Subject: Re: [At-Large] Motion to get the list back on topic John and all my friends, ALS's do not have accredited groups from the documentation currently available. So, no INEGroup is not and cannot be thus accredited as Jacqueline seems to be indicating. However I am a member of the ALAC and also spokesman for INEGroup, and will likely remain so for the forseeable future. However INEGroup is registered with the federal registry, and the FEC and has been sense 1998. And our membership is growing! >:) All of our members whom elected me as spokesman are users as well as Domain Name registrants. Ergo as spokesman and as a ALAC member our voices, opinions are expressed through myself or independantly as they apply to only myself accordingly. John Levine wrote:

...

From the ALS listing on alac.icann.org, INEGroup is not an accredited ALS.

Of course not, since it doesn't exist in the reality-based world.

...

The ALAC rules exist and the Chair has indicated that it will be considered, so I look forward to the ALAC decision, and hopefully a more streamlined and productive list with fewer distractions.

I certainly hope so. We have literally decades of experience with email discussion lists, and one of the hard-won lessons is how easily lists can be wrecked by one or two disruptive people. After trying every imaginable alternative, it's always become clear that there's only one solution, which is to remove the disruptive parties.

It's much easier in this case because the parties in question have a multi-year history of doing exactly the same thing to one list after another. If you don't believe me, look at the archives at the At-Large Study Committee list in 2001-2002:

http://atlargestudy.org/forum_archive/index.shtml

Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor "More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.

Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827 _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann .org At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org

Jacqueline and all my friends, Right. I do not send to the committee. I do send to the ALAC atlarge list. Ergo my meaning in part. Secondly and as I already mentioned, I do not belong as a member to the ALAC staff and cannot due to conflict of interest, please try to read my post completely and than you will understand more fully and accurately in the future. Have you been educated yet again properly? I hope so. If not, I shall endevor to try, try again. "Jacqueline A.Morris" wrote:

Seems we have to educate again. The ALAC is the At Large Advisory Committee. There are 15 members. They are listed at alac.icann.org. No one can simply "join" the ALAC. If you are a member of an organisation that is an accredited ALS, then you may run for a position on the ALAC through the RALO election process in your geographic region. Or you may submit an application to the ICANN NomCom for appointment to a position on ALAC. All RALOs accept groups as ALSes. Some also accept individuals. The criteria for ALS accreditation are posted at alac.icann.org. INE Group is NOT an Accredited ALS according to the listing on the ALAC website. From what I have seen, it does not qualify to be an ALS, but if it wanted to participate in the structure, it could and should certainly apply, and the ALAC can apply the criteria. I don't know what "Federal" registration means, as that term has nothing to do with ICANN and thus ALAC. Therefore, the FACTS are: INE Group is not an ALS. Jeffrey A. Williams is NOT a member of the ALAC.

Can we move on? There are a lot of issues open for comment. Anybody want to talk about any of those?

Jacqueline

Thompson, Darlene wrote:

...

You are a "member of the ALAC"??? In what capacity? What is your title? This is certainly news to me.

And, I'm sorry, but we aren't just looking at a few disgruntled parties but an entire community that is tired of your multiple postings, cross postings, and off-topic postings. When one person is responsible for over 40% of the postings on one list then there is obviously a problem.

I, too, am not your friend and wish to see this cease. If you cannot moderate yourself, then accept moderation from someone else.

Darlene

Darlene A. Thompson Community Access Program Administrator Nunavut Department of Education/N-CAP c/o P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 dthompson@gov.nu.ca

-----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jeffrey A. Williams Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 2:25 PM To: John Levine Cc: ALAC Subject: Re: [At-Large] Motion to get the list back on topic

John and all my friends,

ALS's do not have accredited groups from the documentation currently available. So, no INEGroup is not and cannot be thus accredited as Jacqueline seems to be indicating. However I am a member of the ALAC and also spokesman for INEGroup, and will likely remain so for the forseeable future.

However INEGroup is registered with the federal registry, and the FEC and has been sense 1998. And our membership is growing! >:) All of our members whom elected me as spokesman are users as well as Domain Name registrants. Ergo as spokesman and as a ALAC member our voices, opinions are expressed through myself or independantly as they apply to only myself accordingly.

John Levine wrote:

...

...

From the ALS listing on alac.icann.org, INEGroup is not an

accredited ALS.

...

Of course not, since it doesn't exist in the reality-based world.

...

The ALAC rules exist and the Chair has indicated that it will be considered, so I look forward to the ALAC decision, and hopefully a

more

...

...

streamlined and productive list with fewer distractions.

I certainly hope so. We have literally decades of experience with

email

...

discussion lists, and one of the hard-won lessons is how easily lists

can

...

be wrecked by one or two disruptive people. After trying every

imaginable

...

alternative, it's always become clear that there's only one solution, which is to remove the disruptive parties.

It's much easier in this case because the parties in question have a multi-year history of doing exactly the same thing to one list after another. If you don't believe me, look at the archives at the

At-Large

...

Study Committee list in 2001-2002:

http://atlargestudy.org/forum_archive/index.shtml

Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for

Dummies",

...

Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com,

ex-Mayor

...

"More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann .org

At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org

_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org

Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

At 12:50 06/03/2008, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:

From the ALS listing on alac.icann.org, INEGroup is not an accredited ALS. There were regional ALS-only lists created previously, but most were discontinued last year by request, as the number of mailing lists was huge and, some felt, unmanageable. The problem with client-side monitoring as Evan suggests is bandwidth for people in locations with low and expensive bandwidth. I can set up all sorts of rules on my computer, but then I still have to download the mail before it gets to implement those rules. Same problem if I want to implement rules on my server (if my server is locally hosted, and if I even have access to so do) The ALAC rules exist and the Chair has indicated that it will be considered, so I look forward to the ALAC decision, and hopefully a more streamlined and productive list with fewer distractions. My $0.02 Jacqueline

Dear Jacqueline, The true problem is as you say the low/costly bandwidth users. Roberto Gaetano experimented a solution at the DNSO/GA years ago with a filtered version of the list which matched that requirement. However, at the same time we must stay democratic and we cannot filter out anyone. This is why I plead for two different membership lists, filtering debates through two non restricted lists: - one list internal to the ALAC where shared responsibility for monitoring and accepting posters will depend on ALS Chairs. - one list external to the ALAC welcoming every interested @large. It is likely that interesting topics brought up on the second list will also be discussed on the internal list in order to get an ALAC common position. One way to stay in tune and transparent would be that Members of the second list can receive the mails of the first list. They would answer them on the second list. If some of their point is of interest for the internal list, internal list members will comment, making their colleagues informed. I feel this double list system might respect the rights and expectations of everyone and could be simple to set-up and manage. jfc