List management: was [chapter-delegates] Latest ISOC WGIG statement

[James M Galvin]

The message below suggests that ISOC public policy discussions should 
occur in public.  I want to clarify what that means, i.e., to indicate 
what ISOC's policy is with respect to the mailing list in question.

That list is open to any ISOC member and, to that extent, it is a 
public mailing list.  Similarly, the archive is open to any subscriber. 
Note that any ISOC member can subscribe to the list and elect not to 
receive messages so they can read the archive.

That policy has been in place since the list was created.

While ISOC does support openness and transparency in general, I am not 
sure I understand the value of ISOC conducting this part of its 
business in a completely transparent way, i.e., to allow anonymous 
contributions to its public policy discussions.  Could someone say more 
about how this would be helpful to ISOC and how ISOC would benefit from 
such a change?

For now, we view that mailing list as a member service, and encourage 
those members for whom public policy is important to participate on 
that mailing list.

Jim




--On Monday, May 02, 2005 3:13 PM +0200 Alan Levin 
<alan at futureperfect.co.za> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 2 May 2005, at 11:15, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
> > At the same time, may I make the suggestion that ISOC policy
> > discussions among members happen in public? I don't see a reason
> > why  they should be kept private.
>
> I think we've mostly agreed on this as a default.
>
> ISOC-ZA support transparency wherever possible and if the label on
> this list is to have any meaning than we support that it's opened -
> for unmoderated subscription and publicly accessible archives - as
> soon as possible.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Alan
> ISOC-ZA chair
>
>