On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 11:25 +0100, MJ Ray wrote: (Anything chopped I probably agree with)
> AFFS knows (or can find out or decide) what resources it can > offer but LUGs don't. It should offer those as a starting point, > along with an invitation for LUGs to ask questions. LUGs are the > backbone of our free software community at the minute and AFFS > offers them little. True. I know in the past we've been asked by LUGs for basic things like leaflets - we're probably the easiest/quickest place to get FSFE leaflets, and obviously we have our own stuff. But, I don't think there is a huge amount we can offer LUGs because we're a different type of organisation; we're primarily about campaigning whereas a LUG is a much more hands-on thing. There is definitely an overlap and mutual interest there, though. > All of the suggestions seem good ones, but which have > resources and opportunity? For example, a LUG newsletter would > need an editorial policy, decisions about publishing and some > real bridge-building with LUGs to get a good distribution. Well, the idea of a LUG newsletter would be that it would be very similar to what we do already - it could be more or less the same thing we send our members, modulo some bits of content - it would be good use of resources we already have. And, I think the resources thing is key - we can't offer things which will take us a lot of time to do, because we simply don't have the resources for that right now. > More generally, AFFS should be a figurehead or a muster point > when it's appropriate. In some fields, it's probably no longer > appropriate and it's time to work with, in or on the group > that is the figurehead, instead of continuing the pretense of a > workgroup. In others, if there was a clear offer for workgroups, > I think it could work. Yeah, I totally agree. > > [...] but maybe the answer is that we open affs-ctte, start > > an affs-private and hope that the majority of discussion continues on > > ctte? [...] > > Just as a straw poll: do others think this is worth pushing? [...] > > The sentiment is good, but the past archives shouldn't be opened Oh, that's not on the table, I don't think we could (legally) even if we wanted to, there are all sorts of private mails on there :D The idea of opening affs-ctte was basically predicated on the assumption that habits are hard to break - maybe there are some on ctte who have a problem working on a public list, I don't know, but I suspect most use of the private list is simply out of habit. What Andrew said about commitment is probably bang on the money - it's about breaking habits. > I think ctte just working on public lists unless it's actually a > private matter would be better and simpler. It may help to keep > down the number of uninformative noise posts too. Do you think AFFS-Project is the list, FSFE-UK or some other new list? I personally think AFFS-Project is it. I'm interested in what others think about this. Cheers, Alex. _______________________________________________ Fsfe-uk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfe-uk
