<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: [governance] Trying to "fix" the list Explanation and apology</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'>Good to see the range of views being put forward, and some open discussion on this, so Ginger it wasn’t so bad a mistake to make after all!<BR>
<BR>
This list periodically has disruptive influences (who was the person who during WSIS preparations kept posting long diatribes on the inner workings of UNIX?) Others I could name meant well but were just highly unusual to the point where they input could be considered disruptive.<BR>
<BR>
We seem to have quite different opinions here on the option of a closed list – some strongly for, some strongly against. I have a personal preference for an open list, but I do have a higher tolerance for noise on lists than some. Perhaps if English wasn’t my first language I would feel different however.<BR>
<BR>
But if there is a strong feeling either way I here I am happy to go with the general direction!<BR>
<BR>
Ian<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 13/08/09 1:26 AM, "Ginger Paque" <gpaque@gmail.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT SIZE="4"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'><FONT FACE="Arial">Hi everyone,<BR>
First an explanation and apology. My last email post was meant for Ian Peter (offlist) as a discussion between co-coordinators, not for the list. Unfortunately, I am multi-tasking from an excellent IGF preparatory meeting in Rio, and this error was a result.<BR>
<BR>
>From a viewpoint of transparency, it is not terrible--I would not however, treat this subject in this manner on the list, as I did permit myself more latitude in a private email. I have already apologized to Alejandro Pisanty for making public a private conversation.<BR>
<BR>
I am glad to see nonetheless that responses have been productive and coherent. Perhaps we can make positive use of this error to find alternatives to improve the efficiency of the list. I do emphasize that the objective is not censorship, but working together to make the list work better, and in particular, to stop people from unsubscribing due to distracting posts.<BR>
<BR>
My personal opinion is still that the most obvious solution is the use of filters and message rules in our email applications to control unwanted emails. However, the number of sign-offs, and the distraction from substantial discussion concerns me. Let us please discuss Avri's suggestion and any others that come up. Please opine.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks. Best,<BR>
Ginger<BR>
</FONT><FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><BR>
Jacqueline A. Morris wrote: <BR>
</FONT></SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT SIZE="4"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'><FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"> <BR>
I agree with Avri's suggestion - working group lists can take a lot of the<BR>
back and forth traffic off the main list and allow for more focused<BR>
discussion on getting something done. But that won't do anything about<BR>
troll activity, though... and I'd be against giving up the list's openness<BR>
and transparency and democracy just to get rid of some people that others<BR>
find annoying - our main principles need to be upheld, despite any troll<BR>
issues.<BR>
<BR>
Jacqueline A. Morris<BR>
jam@jacquelinemorris.com<BR>
<a href="http://www.jacquelinemorris.com">http://www.jacquelinemorris.com</a><BR>
<a href="http://www.google.com/profiles/jacqueline.morris.">http://www.google.com/profiles/jacqueline.morris.</a><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Avri Doria [<a href="mailto:avri@psg.com]">mailto:avri@psg.com]</a> <BR>
Sent: Wednesday, 12 August 2009 11:17 AM<BR>
To: Governance/IGC List<BR>
Subject: Re: [governance] Trying to "fix" the list<BR>
<BR>
Hi,<BR>
<BR>
It would be a fundamental change to the openness of the list. <BR>
Especially given the number of well respected people who are <BR>
participants on the list and not 'members'.<BR>
<BR>
I would not be in favor because it is a movement away from <BR>
transparency (not matter what i feel about being personally baited <BR>
from time to time) and because it would end a very important kind of <BR>
outreach this list has - one can sign up, be here, participate and <BR>
then decide to join when it came time to vote on something (or sooner <BR>
if wished).<BR>
<BR>
If anything i would recommend, and support, the creation of smaller <BR>
side lists that were topical and project oriented (i.e. to write a <BR>
statement on x), closed for posting to IGC members and invited others, <BR>
but with open archives.<BR>
<BR>
a.<BR>
<BR>
On 12 Aug 2009, at 10:07, Ginger Paque wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT></SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT SIZE="4"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'><FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"> <BR>
Is it possible for us to propose and implement a trial procedure to <BR>
later be voted upon and approved by the list?<BR>
<BR>
Can we ask cpsr to open another list for the IGC, called "related <BR>
topics". This would be an open list. We would change the governance <BR>
list from an open list to a moderated membership, where new members <BR>
would have to be approved by the coordinators upon signing up.<BR>
<BR>
Coordinators could transfer any thread to the related topic list if <BR>
it is not directly related to IG process substance. This would be <BR>
one of the duties of the coordinators, and would not require <BR>
approval, vote or consensus.<BR>
<BR>
After 60 days or so, we could vote on the procedure and add it to <BR>
the charter.<BR>
<BR>
Is this practical, appropriate, legal?<BR>
<BR>
Any thoughts?<BR>
<BR>
I ran into Alejandro Pissanty (sp?) yesterday and he thinks we <BR>
should take pre-emptive action and remove three people. I do not <BR>
think that is a proper procedure, although I have to admit, I would <BR>
be willing to do it, and then resign for improper conduct, if I <BR>
thought the ICG would be able to make it stick :o)<BR>
<BR>
gp<BR>
____________________________________________________________<BR>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>
governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:<BR>
governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
<BR>
For all list information and functions, see:<BR>
<a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
____________________________________________________________<BR>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>
governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:<BR>
governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
<BR>
For all list information and functions, see:<BR>
<a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
____________________________________________________________<BR>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>
governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:<BR>
governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
<BR>
For all list information and functions, see:<BR>
<a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="3" WIDTH="95%"></FONT></SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Consolas, Courier New, Courier"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:10pt'>____________________________________________________________<BR>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>
governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:<BR>
governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
<BR>
For all list information and functions, see:<BR>
<a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>