[ALAC] ALAC E-mail Guide - for review

[Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond]

Hello all,

I'll let staff go through a final brush on this, especially with regards
to posting rights and the potential for a posting to be manually
moderated by staff if made by a non member to a list.


On 25/07/2013 22:39, Alan Greenberg wrote:
> At 24/07/2013 05:05 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
>
>
>>    * There IMO needs to be more distinction between the functions and
>> scope of the At-Large list vis. the ALAC list.
> Not sure what the issue is confusing those two lists.

Me neither. ALAC list membership does not let non ALAC members (& other
invitees to that list) to post on that list, although its archives are
completely open. At-Large list is for everybody to post/read.


>
>>    * At very least, the At-Large list needs to be re-ordered near the
>> top. Where it is it seems out-of-place and almost as an afterthought.
>
> The order in this document has no real meaning. I ordered them based
> on the progression of ALAC -> RALO -> At-Large, but have not real
> stake in what order they are in.

I agree with Evan that it makes more sense to have the At-Large list
ahead of the RALO lists, next to the ALAC list.

>
>>    * No mention in the Announce list of how unaffiliated members (in
>> regions that allow this) are accommodated. Do they have to
>> self-subscribe?
>
> That is the way it is now. I suppose the Unaffiliated NARALO member
> should be subscribed by staff. Unaffiliated members could be as well,
> but that is not a thing that we have done in the past or now. Since
> they do not have an "ALS" list of their own, certainly something that
> we could do (but we in NARALO need to clean up that entire
> unaffiliated process, so I will presume it will wait for that to happen).

I believe that all subscription and unsubscriptions can be done by users
- but must be allowed/denied by staff.

>
>>    * The change from ExCom to "Leadership Team" is new, and needs to
>> be announced (and perhaps discussed) separately
>
> The list is still called ExCom and that is how it is documented. The
> comment notes that it will likely change at some point after the new
> RoP are in place. Presumably once the new RoP goes into effect and we
> start using the new name, appropriate announcements will be made.

+1. It is not the purpose of the present document to explain what
"Leadership Team" is.


>
>>    * The regional lists' info don't say much about the treatment of
>> RALO non-members. Does everyone have the same privileges, including
>> possibly the overpowering by outsiders of discussions amongst RALO
>> members?
>
> I have never heard of any such rules in any of the RALO lists (perhaps
> ignorance on my part) but presume if there were any, they would be
> RALO-initiated. In light of recent experiences, we probably should add
> something regarding the what level of Authority the RALO Chair has
> over list.

I cringe on closing RALO lists to people who are not members of a
region. We are an open community. We expect everyone taking part in
discussions to follow netiquette so as not to overpower discussions.

>
>>    * Does a single code of conduct govern all lists, or are there
>> different codes for each list?
>
> The RoP talks about a Code of Conduct for all At-Large electronic
> communications platforms including e-mail. I presume that a RALO could
> add additional rules, but I have never heard of such an occurrence.

Indeed Alan. At a higher level, all correspondence is covered by ICANN's
very own rules too.
It would be surprising if RALOs were in need of yet more restrictive
Codes of Conduct.

Kind regards,

Olivier