[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [atlarge-discuss] Forum Usage at dot-org
Dear all,
The Panel needs a discussion environment in private, it can be a forum, a
list or a chat, the advantages or not of each suggested means it will be
seen in each case. But it is necessary to maintain an environment at least
where the Panel can "to meet" in private.
EVERYTHING cannot be discussed with the mass of members, it is not effective
and not very executive to obtain results of the performance of this Panel.
But CARE, this doesn't mean that the Panel doesn't have the OBLIGATION of
giving to know EVERYTHING to the members and to put to voting or
consideration the transcendent topics (this will be established in the
statutes).
.......................................
[ES] El Panel necesita un ámbito de discusión en privado, puede ser un foro,
una lista o un chat, las ventajas o no de cada medio sugerido se verá en
cada caso. Pero es necesario mantener al menos un ámbito donde el Panel
pueda "reunirse" en privado.
TODO no puede ser discutido con la masa de miembros, no es efectivo y poco
ejecutivo para obtener resultados de la actuación de este Panel. Pero
CUIDADO, esto no quiere decir que el Panel no tenga la OBLIGACION de dar a
conocer TODO a los miembros y poner a votación o consideración los temas
trascendentes (esto deberá ser establecido en los estatutos).
greetings,
Mauro.-
----- Mensaje original -----
De: Jeff Holt
Para: atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de
Enviado: Sábado, 12 de Julio de 2003 06:27 p.m.
Asunto: RE: [atlarge-discuss] Forum Usage at dot-org
RE: Regarding the Private Webteam Forum topic vs. the General Webteam
Topic.
I agree with Hugh that there is a need for some technical information to
be secure from public view, such as URLs and debugging information. I
believe it might also be possible to hide the existence of that closed
forum, but will defer that to Mr. Chirita to research and implement.
Abel does have a point in that seeing a "private" forum and not being
able to access it will be like holding a candy over the reach of a young
child, they will try and jump to get it, lol....
The General Webteam topic should be used for the general membership to
make contributions, suggestions, or trouble reports and as such must be
open to the entire membership. The semantics may be the only difficulty
- forum as opposed to discussion as opposed to topic as opposed to
thread, and so forth.
Sincerely,
Jeff Holt
Jefftttt@txucom.net
www.tejas-info-services.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Abel Wisman [mailto:abel@able-towers.com]
Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 3:38 PM
To: atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de
Subject: RE: [atlarge-discuss] Forum Usage at dot-org
But not adequately.
It is very easy to use a part of the icannatlarge server for such pages,
or they can be emailed, or uploadedand ulled by the recipients, many a
solution that doesn't any form of secrecy nad if this is the prefered
method, then email in private, though it defeats the whole "openess"
idea. It means simply that you do not allow people to see anything that
is in progress, meaning also that no comments or input can be given
before a fait a complait is reached.
This is a membership first process, in all stages and on all fronts,
withholding anything from the membership that is not strictly
person-bound (privacy data) is against everything this organization
stands for.
Members have a right to read what the panel does and posts, members have
a right to see what the comms are doing. Private lists all to easy
become the source for all discussion on that comm and the membership has
no way of verifying what is done and how it is done or why it is done.
I remain opposed to the closed group on the forums.
Abel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hugh Blair [mailto:hblair@hotfootmail.com]
> Sent: 12 July 2003 21:29
> To: abel@able-towers.com
> Subject: RE: [atlarge-discuss] Forum Usage at dot-org
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Abel Wisman
> >
> > I fail to see what needs to be so "private" that matters concerning
> > web-comm can not be discussed in public.
> >
> > I would like to see an example of that information that the
> > world has no need of knowledge of.
>
> Here's one example from just today and then this is my last
> post on this subject.
>
> Today I posted to my personal server some pages and a ZIP
> that the webmaster might want to use on the site. It was the
> best way for him to see how they looked and get the page code. In
> NO way do I want that posting to be public - it's considered
> a staging site.
>
> If that section of the forum was public, I'd be getting hits
> from who knows where and who knows how many, and those pages
> would then be public before they'd been looked at by the
> webmaster who may want changes to them.
>
> Asked. Answered.
>
> Hugh
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de