<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [alac] Action points / proposals from the Rome meetings



At 10:03 04/03/25 -0800, you wrote:
Denise, I receive many spam from  [alac-forum] list, and wonder
how this could happen if it is moderated.

I attach just one header as an example.

izumi

From: "Reggie Arnold" <gyyxuhoshilp@xxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "Reggie Arnold" <gyyxuhoshilp@xxxxxxx>
To: forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [alac-forum] Stop paying too much for cigarettes
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:06:34 -0200
X-IP: 243.60.164.125
Sender: owner-alac-forum@xxxxxxxxx


The web-based ALAC forum is moderated (spam, etc. is not posted).  ALAC
members, per your request, receive all emails sent to the forum address
(before they are posted).


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-alac@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-alac@xxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
> Roberto Gaetano
> Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 9:04 AM
> To: roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; izumi@xxxxxxx
> Cc: alac@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [alac] Action points / proposals from the Rome meetings
>
>
> >
> > >      17.  We should find a way to revitalize our forum and/or
> > >      replace it with something more appealing to users.
> > >      (Proposal: shall we merge it with the GA list?)
> >
> > >    Though Denise said it is moderated, I think it is not - there
> > >    are too many spam mails there!  Merging with GA, or adding a
> > >    new list with GA may work.
> >
> >Traditionally, the GA list has only been open to subscribers;
> >alac-forum is attracting spam, though.  The real problem of the GA
> >list is not spam, though:  It is the bad karma that this list has
> >collected.  In hindsight, I guess that shutting down the GA list and
> >starting over with stricter rules migh have been a better idea than
> >keeping the moribund GA list alive.
>
> I agree that to force a merger will create more problems than it solves.
> Also, if the idea is to find "something more appealing to users" I don't
> think that the GA will help.
>
> >
> >That said, we urgently need to find some way for open discussion --
> >the current forum clearly does not work: While we may have a hard
> >time to reach out, those people who are coming to us (through the
> >forum) have an even harder time getting any response back from ALAC,
> >or getting involved in any discussion with others who are
> >interested.  Let's face it: In terms of enabling communication among
> >individuals about ICANN issues, we have been a miserable failure so
> >far.  I'd hope we can change that.
>
> The problem is that if the message is received by everybody, with nobody
> specifically in charge for it, it will not be answered. If we
> want to manage
> an open forum, we need to allocate the resources to it.
> Personally, I would be more in favour to a web post without sending to a
> mailig list. But this does not change the issue, which is who answers.
>
> >
> > >      18.  We should find a way to make the als-discuss list
> > >      operational and active.  (Proposal: shall we appoint one of
> > >      us as "facilitator" for public communication, with the
> > >      specific responsibility to oversee public discussion mailing
> > >      lists?)
> >
> > >    I would recommend to have two people, perhaps, than only one
> > >    facilitator. Unless we have "superman/women".
> >
> >While it's good to have someone who's responsible, I'd hope that --
> >once we have put an infrastructure in place that actually encourages
> >communication -- all members of this committee attempt to
> >participate in discussions.
>
> Again, it is OK if everybody participates to the discussion on a
> voluntary
> basis, but without a responsible we will never get good results.
>
> Regards
> Roberto
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>

                     >> Izumi Aizu <<
                 Asia Network Research
                        www.anr.org
                             &
 GLOCOM /Institute for HyperNetwork Society

<< Writing the Future of the History >>