<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<font face="Arial">Excellent discussion... Thanks everyone.<br>
<br>
The mailing list is now "Powered by electric Embers using the NPO
Groups version of Sympa 5.3.4"<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Arial">I personally find the mailing list format to be very
effective. Ning in particular requires that you go to the website to
read any post, which I find very irritating and difficult if I do not
have a good connection. One thing we need to do is make better use of
the IGCaucus website as a resource with documents, links and other
information. This will help the cross-document organization that
Katitza and Jacqueline have commented on. That quite simple to do and I
will work with the new co-coordinator and any volunteers to do this
over the December holidays.<br>
<br>
I am not at all convinced that we want to increase the membership of
the IGC, or move "into the mainstream". I think we need both our
active, vocal members, and our quite readers, but definitely
emphasizing quality over quantity. If we are having substantive
discussions, and working well, we will attract the members we want. I
know that goes against the current thinking about social networking,
but I think we should keep that in mind. Invite individuals who might
be interested: yes. But some kind public campaign? I would be very
cautious about that. Note: our mailing list numbers are much higher
than our actual membership due to inactive accounts and duplicate email
subscriptions for some members who prefer to receive mailings at
multiple addresses.<br>
<br>
On several levels I object to a membership "fee". On a practical level,
Venezuela has a very strict foreign exchange control, so 50 cents or
ten dollars is a problem for me, which makes me aware of the logistical
and personal problem this can generate for others as well. On a
theoretical level, I also object. I think it somehow changes the
character of the membership and the "entry barrier" of the group.<br>
<br>
I do like Tracy's (and Katitza's) basic idea of a more organized,
possibly funded IGC. Ian has proposed this possibility several time,
but we have not yet found a workable structure for this. I think this
discussion is a good way to explore options.<br>
<br>
Thanks, everyone!<br>
Best, Ginger<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</font><br>
Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:399A9B8A-9827-4C84-A021-6F9CB31B519E@ciroap.org"
type="cite">On 07/12/2009, at 5:56 AM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google
wrote:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">1. Evolve the dialog away from the dated
mailing/discussion list format towards a more transparent and open
Social Networking & Collaboration platform - I recommend that Marc
Andreessen's and Giani Bianchini's brilliant Ning technology be used as
opposed to the somewhat restricted Facebook, Orkut, and the like.
Establishment of appropriate IGC presences on Twitter, Scribd and
YouTube will also be useful. Utilization of emerging solutions such as
Google Wave should be explored. Enterprise solutions such as Social
Text, Lotus Connections are also available if a more robust solution is
desirable.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
It's a good suggestion, however apart from the other reservations that
have been expressed about this, I would not like to see us move to a
proprietary hosted platform, which could compromise our independence.
Sympa is open source software which can be hosted anywhere by anyone,
so if we want to migrate the list including all its archives to another
server at no cost, we can easily do so. It's for the same reason that
I have been critical of the IGF for switching to a proprietary Web
conferencing system, WebEx, over the open source one DimDim that was
used last year.
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>