Mark,
In a perfect world where there were no silos to protect and egos to bruise,
of course this would make sense.
However, look at the responses so far. Individuals who should rightfully
be participants in the IFWP/DNSO discussions are refusing to be IFWP list
participants.
Go figure.
Gene...
+++
Hi Cthulhu's Little Helper, you wrote on 6/26/99 3:15:23 PM:
>
>Given the recent discussion regarding the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list being the
>regular expression of the GA of the DNSO, and given what seems to be
>interest in making the IFWP list that same general expression, what's
>to stop anyone from just subscribing [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
>
>(Well, ok, Richard and the manager of the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list, but...
>not my point.)
>
>It would effectively make this list the regular expression of the DNSO
>GA (as most of the subscriber base is with IFWP, and I'd imagine there's
>quite a bit of overlap between IFWP subscribers and [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>subscribers), subverting Amadeu's request nicely.
>
>Of course, the manager of the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list could just unsubscribe
>[EMAIL PROTECTED], but I'd be interested to see how that precedent is couched
>and presented to the other members of the GA who would suddenly be
>vulnerable to unsubscription if their address was "suspicious" or otherwise
>not acceptable to the list manager.
>
>Note that I'm not advocating anything here, all of this is hypothetical.
>But I am curious how a situation like this would play out, and what
>holes in the "list X is the regular expression of the GA" idea it
>exposes.
>
>--
> Mark
>
>
+++++++++++++++++++++
I'm very happy @.HOME
Gene Marsh
president, anycastNET Incorporated
