[KI-LC] [BoT] [SPAM] Re: Group "Join" Form
Roger Martin
roger.martin at corp.aol.com
Wed Jul 1 07:05:08 PDT 2009
I'm making the changes to the draft based on Trent's suggestions (and my
responses) and will post it shortly.
....rogerM
p.s. Somewhere along the line I inadvertently changed this discussion
from the "For Review: Email Discussion Policy" thread to the "Group
"Join" Form" thread. I will post the new draft notice as a new thread:
"Policy for Joining Groups and Group Discussion Lists".
Cahill, Conor P wrote:
> "Lurker" seems reasonable to me :-)..
>
> Conor
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: trustees-bounces at kantarainitiative.org [mailto:trustees-
>> bounces at kantarainitiative.org] On Behalf Of J. Trent Adams
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 9:51 AM
>> To: Brett McDowell
>> Cc: Leadership Council; Roger.Martin at corp.aol.com; Kantara BoT
>> Subject: Re: [BoT] [SPAM] Re: [KI-LC] Group "Join" Form
>>
>> Brett -
>>
>> I'm comfortable with "follower", but am open to other terms that convey
>> the same sense of someone "passively keeping up with the work, but not
>> interested in contributing."
>>
>> I'd considered "voyeur", but didn't think that was the best idea.
>>
>> - Trent
>>
>>
>> Brett McDowell wrote:
>>
>>> Is everyone happy with the word "Follower"?
>>>
>>> Brett McDowell | +1.413.652.1248 | http://KantaraInitiative.org
>>>
>>> On Jul 1, 2009, at 9:07 AM, J. Trent Adams wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Roger -
>>>>
>>>> Your edits make sense to me.
>>>>
>>>> Do you want to take a whack at a clean version and recirculate?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks again,
>>>> Trent
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Roger Martin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Trent,
>>>>>
>>>>> I've been at an off-site all day and am just now getting to my
>>>>>
>> email.
>>
>>>>> See my responses embedded below.
>>>>>
>>>>> rogerM
>>>>>
>>>>> /******************************************
>>>>> Roger Martin, Director of Standards
>>>>> AOL
>>>>> 22260 Pacific Blvd 41A:A03
>>>>> Dulles, VA 20166
>>>>> email: roger.martin at corp.aol.com
>>>>> AIM: rjmartin99
>>>>> phone: 703-265-6203
>>>>> mobile: 703-389-1547
>>>>> *******************************************/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> J. Trent Adams wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Roger M. -
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This appears to be a great clarification and streamlining of the
>>>>>> process
>>>>>> we were trying to define. I definitely appreciate the time and
>>>>>>
>> effort
>>
>>>>>> you put into carefully preserving the spirit of the prior work,
>>>>>>
>> while
>>
>>>>>> also improving it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My nits are so minor I feel embarrassed even bringing them up:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. The term "Intellectual Property Rights" is
>>>>>> introduced earlier than the acronym was
>>>>>> parenthetically defined. Perhaps moving up the
>>>>>> acronym to the first instance?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> [RM] oops!! yes, it should be moved up to the first usage
>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. The term "Follower" is now only referenced in
>>>>>> the second bullet of Section (6). Perhaps it makes
>>>>>> sense to eliminate the term from the Definitions
>>>>>> Section (2) and insert the meaning in (6)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> [RM] Good point. I considered this, but decided it was useful to
>>>>> have the definition. In addition, we should change the fourth
>>>>>
>> bullet
>>
>>>>> in (5) to read:
>>>>>
>>>>> * A non-Participant in a Group may subscribe to a Group List as
>>>>>
>> a
>>
>>>>> Follower. A non-Participant Subscriber has read-only
>>>>>
>> permission
>>
>>>>> and may not post to the List.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> 3. If we're leveraging defined terms (e.g. Member,
>>>>>> Participant, etc.) from other Controlling
>>>>>> Documents, do we need to formally reference
>>>>>> them in some way? Perhaps by including them
>>>>>> in the Definitions Section (2), linking a reference
>>>>>> to the Bylaws and/or Operating Procedures as
>>>>>> appropriate?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> [RM] In the Operating Procedures we defined only those needed
>>>>>
>> terms
>>
>>>>> that had not been defined in the Bylaws. So, I think we should
>>>>> continue that practice. The reason for doing it that way is to
>>>>> prevent future conflicts should we change a definition in one
>>>>>
>> document
>>
>>>>> and forget to change it in another. In the Bylaws we included the
>>>>> following as the introduction to the Definitions in Section 1:
>>>>>
>>>>> /Whenever a term defined below is capitalized, it is used as
>>>>> defined. If the word or /
>>>>> /phrase does not have leading capital letters, then it is to be
>>>>> interpreted within the /
>>>>> /context of the specific text. /
>>>>>
>>>>> /A capitalized term not defined below is used as defined in the
>>>>> Organization Bylaws./
>>>>>
>>>>> [RM] For clarity, we should add the above text to each Policy that
>>>>>
>> we
>>
>>>>> create that includes definitions.
>>>>>
>>>>>> 4. In the same vein, if we're referencing externally-
>>>>>> defined terms, do we need to include the term
>>>>>> "Participant of a Group" in this document? This
>>>>>> seems close enough to "Participant" as defined
>>>>>> in 1.13 of the Bylaws that perhaps we can remove
>>>>>> the qualifying "of a Group" so they're equivalent?
>>>>>> Or is there a subtle difference I'm missing?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> [RM] Good point. Let's delete the definition for "Participant of
>>>>>
>> a
>>
>>>>> Group".
>>>>>
>>>>> [RM] However, I think we should leave the usage in the rest of the
>>>>> document because the policy with respect to a Group list pertains
>>>>>
>> to a
>>
>>>>> Participant of that specific Group. Otherwise, if we just say
>>>>> "Participant", then an entity that is a Participant of Group A
>>>>>
>> might
>>
>>>>> think it has the right to have posting permission for the Group B
>>>>>
>> List
>>
>>>>> without having signed the Participation Agreement for Group B.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Let me know what you suggest.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks again,
>>>>>> Trent
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Roger Martin wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have spent some time reviewing the "Groups Email Discussion
>>>>>>>
>> List
>>
>>>>>>> Policy" draft and have rewritten it in what I believe to be an
>>>>>>>
>> easier
>>
>>>>>>> to understand and more comprehensive format.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have attached my draft which is based on the following comments
>>>>>>>
>> and
>>
>>>>>>> rationale:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. The Policy needs to address both (1) Joining a Group as a
>>>>>>> Participant and (2) Subscribing to a List as a Follower. In
>>>>>>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>>> current draft these two concepts were intertwined and seemed
>>>>>>>
>> to
>>
>>>>>>> be fairly confusing. I have attempted to split these two
>>>>>>> concepts out into separate sections to the extent possible.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. The introduction of the term "Contributor" is not needed
>>>>>>>
>> since
>>
>>>>>>> "Participant", which is already defined in the Bylaws, is
>>>>>>> sufficient. I have deleted usage of "Contributor". If we
>>>>>>>
>> wish
>>
>>>>>>> to differentiate between Participants who do and do not
>>>>>>>
>> actually
>>
>>>>>>> contribute postings to the Group List, then the term may be
>>>>>>> useful, but personally I do not believe we should be
>>>>>>>
>> encouraging
>>
>>>>>>> the concept of being a "passive" participant in a Group by
>>>>>>>
>> not
>>
>>>>>>> contributing anything.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3. I propose that all Participants in a Group be automatically
>>>>>>> Subscribed to the Group List. If a Member has additional
>>>>>>> representatives who join a Group then they may need to
>>>>>>> Subscribe, but in my opinion the roster of Participants in a
>>>>>>> Group should automatically be included on the Group List.
>>>>>>> Likewise for the BoT and LC lists, those holding a seat on
>>>>>>> either body should be automatically subscribed to both Lists.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have made other changes to the text as I rearranged it, but I
>>>>>>>
>> did
>>
>>>>>>> not intentionally change the meaning of the existing text except
>>>>>>>
>> as
>>
>>>>>>> outlined above.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I apologize that I do not have the document properly formatted,
>>>>>>>
>> but I
>>
>>>>>>> have run out of time and will be in an offsite meeting all day
>>>>>>> tomorrow. As noted in an earlier email, I do not have edit
>>>>>>> permission
>>>>>>> on the online version of the document. I am including it as a
>>>>>>>
>> PDF
>>
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> MSWORD file.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am sending it in its current state for consideration and
>>>>>>>
>> discussion
>>
>>>>>>> as appropriate.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...rogerM
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Roger Martin wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since I do not have "edit" privileges to the "Groups Email
>>>>>>>> Discussion
>>>>>>>> List Policy" and because I feel that these issues should be
>>>>>>>> discussed
>>>>>>>> by the entire list, I was going to posting my recommended
>>>>>>>>
>> changes
>>
>>>>>>>> (and rationale) to the LC and BoT lists in an email.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> However, after spending some time on rewriting the policy, I
>>>>>>>>
>> have
>>
>>>>>>>> decided to draft a new version.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One of the primary difficulties is that while the title of this
>>>>>>>> draft
>>>>>>>> policy is "Groups Email Discussion List Policy", it actually
>>>>>>>>
>> also
>>
>>>>>>>> includes, and to some degree confuses, the policy about joining
>>>>>>>>
>> a WG
>>
>>>>>>>> or DG.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As a result, I am going to propose restructuring it and renaming
>>>>>>>>
>> it
>>
>>>>>>>> to be "Policy for Joining Groups and Group Mailing Lists".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I will post it for consideration as soon as I have completed the
>>>>>>>> redrafting of the document.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ....rogerM
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> /--
>>>>>>>> ******************************************
>>>>>>>> Roger Martin, Director of Standards
>>>>>>>> AOL
>>>>>>>> 22260 Pacific Blvd 41A:A03
>>>>>>>> Dulles, VA 20166
>>>>>>>> email: roger.martin at corp.aol.com
>>>>>>>> AIM: rjmartin99
>>>>>>>> phone: 703-265-6203
>>>>>>>> mobile: 703-389-1547
>>>>>>>> *******************************************/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>> -------
>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> LC mailing list
>>>>>>> LC at kantarainitiative.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/lc_kantarainitiative.org
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> J. Trent Adams
>>>> =jtrentadams
>>>>
>>>> Outreach Specialist, Trust & Identity
>>>> Internet Society
>>>> http://www.isoc.org
>>>>
>>>> e) adams at isoc.org
>>>> o) 703-439-2149
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Trustees mailing list
>>>> Trustees at kantarainitiative.org
>>>>
>>>>
>> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/trustees_kantarainitiativ
>> e.org
>>
>> --
>> J. Trent Adams
>> =jtrentadams
>>
>> Outreach Specialist, Trust & Identity
>> Internet Society
>> http://www.isoc.org
>>
>> e) adams at isoc.org
>> o) 703-439-2149
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Trustees mailing list
>> Trustees at kantarainitiative.org
>> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/trustees_kantarainitiativ
>> e.org
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LC mailing list
> LC at kantarainitiative.org
> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/lc_kantarainitiative.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kantarainitiative.org/pipermail/lc_kantarainitiative.org/attachments/20090701/342196f1/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the LC
mailing list