Discuss mailing list

[kevin <krattai AT gmail.com>]

I vote так  or was that Igen or ja or 是

Anyhow, enough with google translate.  I am prepared to fork and peer
openNIC if this goes much further, with anyone who is interested in
that route, as well.  I did NOT join openNIC to become another ICANN
and I have no problem if that is what some of the members want.  But I
will definitely not participate if that is where we are going with
openNIC.

I DO believe that openNIC, at least (as I posted before) was originally
intended to be something other than or possibly more than ICANN, in a
less restrictive way.  I would prefer that those who want to be an
ICANN alternative take that idea and fork into the vision they see fit.
 I see this as a tremendously divisive topic and maybe I am only part
of a small minority here.  I don't think this will end well.

Kevin

On Wed, 2018-08-08 at 21:52 -0700, vv AT cgs.pw wrote:
> It does seem like a code of conduct is being
> discussed here.
> 
> My opinion is that laws and regulations are not
> a solution in most cases. They work in a society
> where we have courts and police. We have no such
> functions here, and if we did, who would fulfil
> those roles?
> 
> Some people revel in bureaucracy and making rules
> and setting up structures. I understand the
> appeal in that, and indeed it's usefulness. But
> keep in mind that we have so few people involved
> here that, in my opinion, it starts to look like
> a farce when we discuss rules and regulations.
> 
> Many here wish to grow the organization, and
> setting up a more rigid structure may be a good
> prerequisite to that. However, in such a case we
> would lose a lot of what some of us find good about
> OpenNIC. Are we simply an alternative to ICANN, or
> is there more going on here?
> 
> I personally like the freedom experienced by this
> group, and becoming another ICANN would be the
> opposite of what I would prefer to consider. Others
> no doubt have an opposing opinion. I asked earlier
> in this discussion, are we going to fork OpenNIC?
> I honestly believe that this is the only solution
> to the, seemingly forceful, ideas being presented
> lately. I don't think forking is a viable solution
> at this point, so the only conclusion that I can
> come up with is to leave well enough alone. At
> least for now.
> 
> Regards,
>         Ole
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 22:54:54 -0400
> Rouben <rouben AT rouben.net> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > After trying to keep up with the recent threads and votes
> > around what is, essentially, conduct, I kept thinking:
> > why doesn’t OpenNIC have a code of conduct? IMO rather
> > than introduce reactive policy proposals, wouldn’t it be
> > best to have a code of conduct instead, and perhaps even
> > a formal statement of purpose?
> > 
> > Here’s a few examples from high profile open source
> > projects: https://www.ubuntu.com/community/code-of-conduct
> > https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct
> > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Code_of_conduct
> > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council/Code_of_conduct
> > 
> > I rather like the Ubuntu one, because it is an example of
> > an organization with a relatively mature governance
> > structure.
> > 
> > The Arch code of conduct is probably the most practical
> > with lots of details on a number of etiquette points,
> > like quoting posts and bumping old threads.
> > 
> > Gentoo’s is an example of a “short and to the point”
> > style, with pretty much two sections: acceptable and
> > unacceptable behaviours.
> > 
> > Just thinking out loud here...
> > 
> > Rouben
> > 
> 
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproj
> ect.org
-- 
http://ca.linkedin.com/in/kevinrattai/



https://plus.google.com/+KevinRattai/



https://community.spiceworks.com/people/kevinrattai