[NCUC E-team] discuss list

[Brenden Kuerbis]

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Tapani Tarvainen <
ncuc at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:

> On Feb 19 12:44, William Drake (william.drake at uzh.ch) wrote:
>
> > On Feb 19, 2013, at 12:16 PM, Tapani Tarvainen <
> ncuc at TAPANI.TARVAINEN.INFO> wrote:
>
> > > Before it'll actually be useful though we'll need to subscribe
> > > people. I believe the idea was to subscribe all members
>
> > all NCUC members.
>
> Yes.
>
> > So need to read the member list against that of NCSG-discuss and
> > drop out people who are NPOC only. Who I expect will be delighted,
> > since they've complained strenuously in the past about receiving
> > NCUC-related mail on the SG list. Sorry, I suppose that's a task.
> > Maybe you could conspire with Ed to go through the names?
>
> I believe Ed's already been building NCUC member list
> based on stuff he got from Robin.
>
> I don't have access to ncsg-discuss subscriber list though,
> and I don't think Ed has it either.
>
> Brenden,
>
> Could you help here?
>
>

Sure, I'll send the NCSG-Discuss subscriber list to you privately.  FYI,
Wilson also currently has access to the NCSG-Discuss subscriber list, but I
imagine once NCUC-Discuss is setup he'll want to be be removed.

And I agree w/Bill, comparing the NCSG-Discuss subscriber list with any
NCUC membership roster data would be smart.

Furthermore to that point, this might be a good time to start using some
customer relationship management software to help keep track of members in
a more integrated fashion. E.g., David had recommended CiviCRM, which has
plugins to content management platforms we've talked about (wordpress,
drupal).

-- B




> I'm not sure we'll need it (if Robin's info is complete
> enough), but it wouldn't hurt in any case.
>
> > > Another thing to do before announcing the list is to set up
> > > archiving. I understood the plan is to copy old archives over and
> > > keep on adding to them, in effect forking ncsg-discuss.
>
> > Not being sysadmin literate I don't know what forking means.
> > But certainly one would think the ideal outcome is that there's an
> > integrated NCUC archive under our control and that a copy of at
> > least that portion of the archive that is properly NCSG-discuss
> > should remain intact where it is at Syracuse.
>
> I don't have any plans or indeed means to remove anything
> from the Syracuse server, so the part of archive up to
> the split would be in both places. (Which is basically
> what I meant by forking: two lists with common history
> but different future. Like a fork in a road.)
>
> > I can draft a brief welcome message and float it here in case ET
> > folks think there's something I should have added.
>
> It wouldn't hurt. Keep it really short though. As in 2-3 lines.
> Longer explanations can be sent to the list itself.
>
> > Shall we assume with lag time for doing all the above we're shooting
> > for a launch like Friday? So we'd have three days to do your voodoo
> > with the archives, the membership comparison and sign up, and welcome
> > note..?
>
> Sounds like a plan to me.
>
> > > An announcement on ncsg-discuss is also in order;
>
> > I've already mentioned that this would be happening and had back and
> > forth with Alain about it, so I might as well do the follow up when
> > the trigger's pulled.
>
> Good.
>
> --
> Tapani Tarvainen
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/e-team/attachments/20130219/56c12eb8/attachment.html>