Nathan Kennedy wrote: > Ultimately, I don't care if it's hcoop-sysadmin or a new list, but I > think it is important that we have a semi-private way for members to > communicate.
I definitely echo Aaron's reasons for wanting all lists to be public. How about creating a hcoop-private list that is "invitation only" and would be approximately just board members and people in particular volunteer roles? It seems like docelic is the only person left with any objections to using a completely open hcoop-sysadmin for messages that don't fit into one of ntk's problem areas (discussing security vulnerabilities and discussing negotiations with upstream providers). Or maybe I've lost touch with his real feelings there. I just know that docelic recently sent a message to a manual list of recipients that just listed some bugs he had found in the stuff set up on the new systems. I asked him to re-send it to hcoop-sysadmin, and I've interpreted his lack of reply to that as a message that he disagrees but doesn't want to argue about it. However, since I think we have some people who view transparency of all admin processes as important, I think this issue deserves an explicit discussion. So, docelic, would you be OK with my creating a hcoop-private list to be used ONLY for messages falling into the categories that ntk discussed, and using hcoop-sysadmin for any other admin-related messages? _______________________________________________ HCoop-Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://hcoop.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hcoop-discuss
