[MLB-WIRELESS] AWA

[Steven Haigh]

Not exactly that easy...

a) We don't have a record of who has attended the meetings
b) define some sort? Registered? Running? Building? one vote per node? this
will give one person more than one vote - not exacly fair...

Signed,
Steven Haigh

The Internet was designed by the American Military back in the late 60's. It
was designed to be a decentralised information delivery system so that in
the event of a nuclear attack, American Military leaders would still have
access to pornography.

----- Original Message -----
From: "rick" <mibz at optushome.com.au>
To: "Steven Haigh" <netwiz at optushome.com.au>;
<melbwireless at www.wireless.org.au>; "Clae" <clae13 at yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: [MLB-WIRELESS] AWA


> i know its simple but
>
> a> people who have attended meetings
> b> people who have a nod of some sort running,
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steven Haigh" <netwiz at optushome.com.au>
> To: <melbwireless at www.wireless.org.au>; "Clae" <clae13 at yahoo.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 1:25 AM
> Subject: Re: [MLB-WIRELESS] AWA
>
>
> > One thing that struck me when I was consulting people regarding this
> > decision.
> >
> > * How do we define our members? *
> >
> > Well, is it our mailing list? Is it our node database? Is it a members
> list
> > somewhere? Is it the MelbWirelessPeople list on the Wiki?
> >
> > I simply couldn't answer this question. I then consulted who I had seen
> > contribute the most. We still have no clear definition of members. We do
> > however have the idea to have an "electoral database" of sorts where
> people
> > wishing to vote on issues register as Voting Members - which would
enable
> > proxy voting etc... This is outside the scope of what we are trying to
> > implement on Fridays meeting, but will follow in the near future.
> >
> > As you can see from the policy draft just posted
> > (http://www.wireless.org.au/~netwiz/policy.htm), our aims have not
> changed.
> > We have made clear in this policy draft exactly what we mean by Free
> Public
> > Broadband. Until now, this has not been spelt out in black and white.
> >
> > Signed,
> > Steven Haigh
> >
> > The Internet was designed by the American Military back in the late
60's.
> It
> > was designed to be a decentralised information delivery system so that
in
> > the event of a nuclear attack, American Military leaders would still
have
> > access to pornography.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Clae" <clae13 at yahoo.com>
> > To: <melbwireless at www.wireless.org.au>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 12:06 AM
> > Subject: [MLB-WIRELESS] AWA
> >
> >
> > > It semms to me that the decision, right or wrong, to not affiliate
> > > with AWA was made without recourse to the bulk of the members of
> > > wireless.org.au.
> > >
> > > It seems to me that AWA are still working out their operating
> > > principles, and it is premature of us to make such a stance.  My
> > > impression of reading the above is that they are well-intentioned,
> > > and that their description of themselves as a "closed" network, when
> > > read in context, was an attempt to clarify their legal position vis a
> > > vis internet traffic, which may be made redundant in light of further
> > > communication from the relevant departments about the carrier license
> > > requirements on non-profit groups.
> > >
> > > It seems to me that the broader membership of melbwireless will be
> > > much more likely to get involved in admin and tech work if these kind
> > > of decisions are discussed publicly before they are made.  It is
> > > somewhat disconcerting to see this kind of announcement come out of
> > > the blue.
> > >
> > > This is not a technical issue, it involves our goals and our
> > > relationship with another group, so it is quintessentially the kind
> > > of decision which should be opened up to the mailing list and/or
> > > meetings for discussion, as it involves all of us, and our
> > > representation to another group.  I applaud the fact that it is
> > > tabled on the agenda for the next meeting.
> > >
> > >  From their reply: "any decision of large proportion must be voted
> > > upon by the member base"
> > >
> > > Clae.
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
> > > with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message
> > >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
> > with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message
> >
>


To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message