Front page | perl.bootstrap |
Postings from July 2000
On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 08:17:20PM -0400, Adam Turoff wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 02:17:55PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > mjd-list-bootstrap <mjd-list-bootstrap@plover.com> writes:
> > > I'm still expecting people to object to the idea of many many lists.
> > > What happened to the people who were saynig yesterday that there should
> > > only be a few lists?
> >
> > My main objection would be mostly dealt with if the chairs of these
> > "mini-groups" committed to summarizing the discussion and the results of
> > the discussion on the separate mailing lists (or delegating this task to
> > someone else) and posting those summaries to some main list.
>
> I was thinking about this today as well, but about the bootstrap list
> in particular.
>
> My presumption is that a wg chair has an agenda, and has a background
> for the wg area. If the chair were to provide summaries in *all* cases,
> it would lead to these problems:
> 1) is keeping minutes an undue burdon on the wg chair?
> 2) does the chair keeping minutes remove a check or balance on the process?
>
> If someone *else* on a workgroup were charged with maintaining the weekly
> summaries, it would be one less thing a chair needed to deal with, and
> one more way to involve a larger portion of the community. It would also
> provide checks and balances on wg chairs.
>
> It's an idea. Not sure if I'm for or against it.
I'm for. If a working group can't produce a secretary to publish a
weekly summary, I'd say that's evidence that there isn't sufficient
commitment to the WG.
Peace,
* Kurt Starsinic (kstar@orientation.com) ---------- Senior Network Engineer *
| `There is more ado to interpret interpretations than to interpret |
| the things, and more books upon books than upon all other subjects; |
| we do nothing but comment upon one another.' - Michael de Montaigne |
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next