[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [atlarge-discuss] web site



I notice mine and Sotiris name listed as possible webmasters. My
participation with the website would be to provide assistance to whoever is
in charge of the project. I am not a contender for the job of webmaster. I'm
ok with being an indian instead of a chief. Seems we have enough chiefs
already..

So Sotiris, you want to field those questions? I haven't even been invited
to join the wg-web at this point if it already is active. If they need help
they are welcome to call on me. If not, I'm happy to provide help in other
areas.

Just want some direction. Something that so far seems to be lacking.

Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Young" <bruce@barelyadequate.info>
To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 5:13 PM
Subject: RE: [atlarge-discuss] web site


> I concur with what Jefsey is saying here.  Canditate for the job should
note
> their plans in detail.
>
> Bruce Young
> Portland, Oregon USA
> bruce@barelyadequate.info
> http://www.barelyadequate.info
> --------------------------------------------
> Support democratic control of the Internet!
> Go to http://www.icannatlarge.com and Join ICANN At Large!
>
>
> |  -----Original Message-----
> |  From: J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin [mailto:jefsey@club-internet.fr]
> |  Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 3:47 PM
> |  To: atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de
> |  Subject: [atlarge-discuss] web site
> |
> |
> |  As member of the WG-WEB I strongly suggest that possible webmasters or
> |  co-webmaster (like Sotiris and NameCritics) tell us about:
> |
> |  - the machine, platform and accesses they plan.
> |  - the machine IP address and backup-schedule.
> |  - the kind of site they plan
> |  - who will participate/should participate to the site management
> |  - how documents will be produced, accepted
> |  - how will the site relate with the sub-sites.
> |
> |  before we strike any decision.
> |
> |  The reason why is that we have experienced the control of Joop.
> |  I am sure
> |  all of us want it to change, but for the better, building on
experience,
> |  with Joop continuous cooperation (nothing prevent some part of
> |  the site to
> |  remain on the existing system: for example the forum).. None of
> |  us wants to
> |  spend time disputing over site details or webmaster's attitude.
> |  The first
> |  one wanting things to be cool being the new Webmaster and his
> |  team.  This
> |  means that we also want to have a true agreement on the way we can
> |  terminate the mission; protecting both us and the webmaster (he will be
> |  controverted by nature, and he must feel stable and supported).
> |
> |  This means that all the Panel Members and all the WG-WEB are
> |  members of the
> |  editorial committee. We want to work out a solution permitting
> |  them to work
> |  together?
> |
> |  We want good out-reach support. So we want to go the way Richard
defined
> |  it: 190 local sites with possible hundreds of participants. This
> |  should be
> |  well organized through the WG-DNS resource allocation, but the
> |  links from
> |  the main site will have to be maintained and documented. This
> |  calls for a
> |  lot of cooperation, as the site develops.
> |
> |  jfc
> |
> |
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de