listservs

Tue Nov 22 16:50:11 CET 2011

Definitely one list. It is up to us to filter individually on the basis of clear subject lines. Ideally we should have only meaningful discussions so no one will be giving a subject line 'Boring repetitive attack on my favorite target'
best regards

Dorothy K. Gordon
Director-General
Ghana-India Kofi Annan Centre of Excellence in ICT
Mobile: 233 244 311 348
  BB  : 233 265005712
Direct Line: 233 302 683579
Website: www.aiti-kace.com.gh

----- Original Message -----
From: Timothe Litt <litt at ACM.ORG>
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Sent: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 15:23:11 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: listservs

One list.  Complexity only adds barriers to participation: which list to use
intimidates into not sending; wrong list gets negative feedback in addition
to wrong audience; not subscribed to all lists causes one to miss a
discussion on an unexpected list.  And no doubt the alternate list names
will be filled with acronyms that I still can't keep straight - much less
new members.

It's hard enough to get people to participate.  Don't add barriers.  

If the advocates for multiple lists really want pre-filtered info, we could
make the list moderated and they could alternate the responsibility for
tagging subjects.  However, I'd want a guarantee of low latency - which
would be higher than today's.  Are enough people willing to volunteer?  24x7
coverage?  Or they could scan the archives & send a daily summary organized
by their categories with archive links to those who want it.  Or make better
use of the web by organizing and posting messages from the list there. Maybe
teach people about tools (e.g. "arrange by conversation") with a "tip of the
week" message.

But don't put the burden on the sender or ordinary receiver.  It's
counterproductive.  One list.  

Timothe Litt
ACM Distinguished Engineer
---------------------------------------------------------
This communication may not represent the ACM or my employer's views,
if any, on the matters discussed. 

-----Original Message-----
From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of Nuno
Garcia
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 08:06
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] listservs

Although to me its completely irrelevant (I can mute whichever discussions
are not interesting in GMail), I think that creating additional lists will
only increase the entropy of the messaging system.

So I tend to agree with William - concentrating the messages in one list is
best:
- it will allow a more transparent mean of messaging (everyone receives all
the messages)
- it will allow an easier management of the subscriptions (in the case of
multiple lists, the newcomers have to be advised to subscribe to all the
lists that they think can be relevant)
- it will allow a better education of all the members in the constituency.

But, if we decide otherwise, and later we decide that it was a bad move, we
can always go back.

The winnings for the tradeoff between more list options and fewer messages
per list are not that obvious...

Best,
Nuno Garcia

On 22 November 2011 11:00, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:
> Hi Joly
> Perhaps, but I don't see how.  Informed without the substantive 
> debates that account for most traffic would be a contradiction in 
> terms.  Informed without the NCUC internal procedural debates was what I
was suggesting.
>  Announce-only presumably mean both kinds of debates stay on the SG list.
> Not sure how we're talking past each other but anyway let's see what 
> others think,,, Cheers Bill On Nov 22, 2011, at 11:32, Joly MacFie 
> <joly at punkcast.com> wrote:
>
> 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>
wrote:
>>
>> Hiue
>> 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> 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 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - 
>>> > http://wwwhatsup.com
>>> >  http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
>>> >  VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - 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
>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>> -
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -
>