listservs

Tue Nov 22 15:20:17 CET 2011

To clarify, I am a member of many committees and listserves. We get our work done, after the opportunity to fully vet ideas. However, I do not receive an average of 5 emails a day from any of these groups, and I am interested and excited to read the emails I do get.

Here's my suggestion: Robin identifies an issue where a decision must be made and sends an email identifying the issue as such. The issue is discussed for a set period (3-4 days),  and after that time members weigh in on their decision so the decision of the group can be established. If some desire to have an ongoing discussion further on that or other matters, they may do so on a different listserve.

Judy

From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of Joly MacFie
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 5:33 AM
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: Re: listservs

I think you are missing Judy's point. She is saying she wishes to stay involved and informed, without the debates. A well curated announce list is the only solution. Working in harmony with the confluence as a reference.

Avris's further point is this is as true for NCSG as it is for NCUC.

If furthermore NCUC needs to "get a room" to hash out internal discussions, so be it. IMO it's not a question of if but when.

j

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 3:13 AM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch<mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>> wrote:
Hi

It seems we're talking about several different rationales/models for the possible creation of an NCUC listserv, each of which has different implications.

One, which appeals to me, would be a list for discussing any purely internal process stuff.  So discussions (and the occasional disagreements) about how the constituency organizes its affairs, e.g. elections, filling slots on SG bodies or GNSO working groups, and so on, as well as any announcements from the constituency leadership, would go to this list.  Discussions of substantive issues related to GNSO or Internet governance more generally would remain on the SG list, since these really should be of interest to both constituencies' members.

A second, which Avri and Joly are suggesting, would be a list solely for announcements and administrative messages from the constituency leadership.  Personally, I'm not sure I see how much this would help, since a) it's not obvious that there's going to be a need for so many such one-way messages to justify a separate list, and b) this would not address the sort of complaints made by Alain about messages pertaining to NCUC laundry, dirty or otherwise.

A third, which if I understand her correctly Judy Branzelle is suggesting, would be a list that hosts the bulk of discussions both substantive and process, on the grounds that there's just too much mail to read.  This I have even more difficulty with than the second.  While I can understand NPOC members not wanting to read NCUC internal process debates (any more than NCUC members want to read NPOC internal process debates), now that the chartering and reorganization are done, most of our traffic should normally be on substantive issues, as it was before we had to deal with the institutional tumult. I would think that anyone who's made the commitment to get involved in GNSO/ICANN, or at least to keep an eye on developments therein even if they can't consistently participate, should want to be connected to the substantive discussions.  Moving these into an NCUC-only space would impede collective awareness of the issues and make coordination on them more difficult.  A rump SG list that doesn't host these probably would have relatively little traffic or value.

Just my view. What do others think?

Bill

On Nov 22, 2011, at 12:26 AM, Joly MacFie wrote:

I'd say yes to both.

j

On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org<mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
Hi,

The other possibility, it the NCSG leadership is willing to countenance another list, which in the past they weren't, they could establish a NCSG announce list that our leaders could us for informational and transparency purposes.

Or maybe there could be both a NCSG and a NCUC announce-only list for our leaders to use for announcements and transparency when they are acting in the best interests of the membership of the respective organizations.

avri

On 17 Nov 2011, at 15:00, Joly MacFie wrote:

> My 2c.
>
> I believe there should at least be a NCUC-MEMBERS (or suitable equivalent) list, announce-only, for announcements and admin - then people who might otherwise be ignoring the general to-and-fro of NCSG-discuss can set their filters so as to get important notices.
>
> j
>
>
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Joly MacFie  218 565 9365<tel:218%20565%209365> Skype:punkcast
> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com<http://wwwhatsup.com/>
>  http://pinstand.com<http://pinstand.com/> - http://punkcast.com<http://punkcast.com/>
>  VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org<http://isoc-ny.org/>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -

--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365<tel:218%20565%209365> Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com<http://wwwhatsup.com/>
 http://pinstand.com<http://pinstand.com/> - http://punkcast.com<http://punkcast.com/>
 VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org<http://isoc-ny.org/>
--------------------------------------------------------------
-

--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
 http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
 VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
--------------------------------------------------------------
-
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20111122/3b86ced3/attachment-0001.html>