FWIW, I agree with Roberto.
We need to make it easier for people
to find and subscribe to the IFWP list.
At the very least, it should be listed
and easy to find on the IFWP web site.
Jay.
At 01:02 PM 7/8/99 , Richard J. Sexton wrote:
>>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Non-member submission from [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Admin request of type /\bchange\b.*\baddress\b/ at line 6
>>Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 12:49:29 -0400 (EDT)
>>
>>>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jul 8 12:49:27 1999
>>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Received: from fw2.iaea.org (fortress.iaea.org [195.212.98.66])
>> by ns1.vrx.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF696F01F
>> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 8 Jul 1999 12:49:26 -0400 (EDT)
>>Received: from sp1t2n03.iaea.or.at. (ns1.iaea.or.at [161.5.64.79])
>> by fw2.iaea.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA19979
>> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 8 Jul 1999 18:43:17 +0200 (METDST)
>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Received: from iaea-m1.iaea.org (iaea-m1.iaea.or.at [161.5.68.240]) by
>sp1t2n03.iaea.or.at. (AIX4.3/UCB 8.8.8/8.7) with ESMTP id SAA57912; Thu, 8 Jul 1999
>18:39:55 +0200
>>Received: by iaea-m1.iaea.or.at with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
>> id <N32S3ZG4>; Thu, 8 Jul 1999 18:42:56 +0200
>>Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Subject: IFWP list and Internet Governance
>>Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 18:41:29 +0200
>>MIME-Version: 1.0
>>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
>>Content-Type: text/plain
>>
>>Hi, IFWPers.
>>
>>This mail will bounce, as I am unable to get the subscription to the IFWP
>>list with my new address.
>>
>>I first asked Richard Sexton to change my address, and he referred me to
>>instructions at the Web site http://www.open-rsc.org/ - please note that to
>>address a mail to Richard is already a non-straightforward task for the 99%
>>"minority" who refers to the root system as authoritative ;>)
>>
>>I followed instructions at the site (http://www.open-rsc.org/lists/others/),
>>and asked people at my former site to unsubscribe my old address, while I
>>subscribed my new one.
>>
>>In fact, after a couple of days ("Gee, isn't the list silent!"), I realized
>>that the thing did not work. The postmaster at ETSI told me that my mailbox,
>>that is still active for administrative reasons, is flooded with IFWP
>>messages, while I did not get any.
>>So, we did everything once again. But, surprise!, the system did not do it,
>>because it claimed it was already done.
>>
>>So, last resort, the E-Mail address on the Web site for "problems &
>>suggestions", [EMAIL PROTECTED] In fact, it is Andy Sernowitz' E-mail,
>>and he kindly answered that he is not managing this since a year ago.
>>
>>I think that this, while it is just a minor incident (maybe in my getting
>>settled in the new job, city and country I would not have had time anyhow to
>>go through my mail), it is interesting in relationship with the proposal
>>that comes in waves about the IFWP list as the voting body of the Internet,
>>and/or the candidate "unique" list for all Internet issues, and so on. If we
>>cannot change a subscriber's address, can we be trusted in checking voting
>>rights of participants?
>>
>>The cc: to the dnso list has two purposes: first to ask some DNSOer to
>>forward this message to the IFWP, and second to acknowledge that the same
>>operation on the DNSO lists worked the first time through.
>>
>>
>>Regards
>>Roberto
>>
>>P.S.: Please note that my new address is [EMAIL PROTECTED], effective
>>1999-07-01. This is only temporary, because I will move to a personal
>>address soon.
>>
>>
>>
>--
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>"They were of a mind to govern us and we were of a mind to govern ourselves."
>
