[ALAC] ALAC/At-Large Mailing Lists

[Alan Greenberg]

Thanks Yaovi, for the quick reply. My comments below.

At 24/10/2012 04:23 AM, Yaovi Atohoun wrote:
>Hi Alan,
>
>Thank you for this initiative to clarify the use of the various 
>mailing lists.  My comments on your suggestions below:
>
>ALAC
>- Membership for ALAC, RALO Leadership, formal Liaisons appointed by
>the ALAC, Board member and Staff
>- Membership for Liaisons appointed TO the ALAC
>- Perhaps membership to WG Chairs if not already included above
>- Membership for past holders of above categories (my preference, or
>could be receive only - see below)
>
>I agree with the membership list but I am not in favour of 
>automatically adding past holders. However any past 
>holder  subscribing will be approved to be member

Agreed. I should have mentioned that. Currently, sometimes old 
members are simply left there. It should be done only if they 
explicitly say thay want to stay on.


>ALAC-Internal
>- Membership for ALAC, RALO Leadership, formal Liaisons appointed by
>the ALAC, Board member and Staff
>
>My suggestion is that this list includes only ALAC members and 
>staff. I assume that a formal communication from the Board or other 
>groups to ALAC will go through the chair of the staff.

I will note that. My personal opinion is that RALO leadership and the 
Liaison (of which I was one) add something to the list, if for no 
other reason than they are typically at ICANN meetings and need to be 
included in social events. If anything is ever REALLY confidential, 
mailing lists should not be used at all.

Not sure what your reference to Board communications means?????


>ALAC-ExCom (with a new name mapping to the ALAC Leadership Team name
>used in the new RoP)
>- Members of the ExCom, formal Liaisons appointed by the ALAC, Board
>member and Staff
>
>My suggestion is that this list serve only for communication between 
>ALAC-Excom members. I will also include staff.

Again, ccNSO, GNSO and SSAC people tend to be very active members of 
ExCom teleconferences and it would be counter productive to exclude them here.

Alan