Re: DNS: Reasonable limits to discussion

Re: DNS: Reasonable limits to discussion

From: Adam Todd <at§>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:37:38 +1000
>dns&#167; is intended for discussion of Australian DNS issues. 

I totally agree. Australian DNS does cover a wide area though.  It's not
limited in any way to .AU

>1. basic levels of courtesy should be observed - personal attacks on other
>contributors or third persons are unnecessary and will not be tolerated.

OK, I'll go back to my humble self and not point fingers.  That means my
replies will not contain the name of the person specficially unless
necessary.  I was asked to point fingers by members of this list, I prefer
not to and keep discussion generic.  It allows people to explore and change
their minds or understanding without everyone jumping on them.

>2. contributors should avoid undue repetition of arguments; once the basic
>point is made it need not be reiterated or elaborated on ad nauseum.

I hope the other members will stand by this clause. I cetainly have no

>Subscribers should appreciate that these rules are not intended to dampen
>the free expression of ideas, but rather to ensure that debate is relevant

I don't believe they will.  In fact if everyone follows the rules,
discussion will increase considerably and consensus will be reach more fairly.

Can I request one other point? 

That Signatures not be used on the list unless the person is new.  Once we
know each other I see no value in a Sig being splattered all over the
place.  The occasional accidently sig is always fine, you will notice I've
attempted to remember NOT to use my sig at all on this list, because I
figure everyone knows who I am.  And my comments are personal comments
anyway.  They are not in any way representative of any organisation I may
have a connection with.

Possibly a good idea for all to speak for themselves and not an organisation.
Received on Tue Jun 23 1998 - 14:06:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:03 UTC