[ALAC] FW: Mailing list duplication

Tue Aug 12 12:56:11 EDT 2008

I'm concerned about this concept of participation. My "participation" is
driven by my interests.  And quite frankly, not all issues gathered on these
lists have the same value or impact for me. 

IMHO, all "addressees" may participate as they deem fit. For any blanket
'participation' requirement for what is a voluntary chore would be
misplaced.  That would be like work.  And if it is work, it ought to, of
right, attract a fee.

Carlton 

-----Original Message-----
From: alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
[mailto:alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 12:15 PM
To: alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org
Subject: Re: [ALAC] Mailing list duplication

The phrase "and with ALAC" is interesting, and one of the things we 
need to discuss.

Are all ALAC members (or the somewhat larger group, all ALAC members 
and RALO management) obliged to monitor all communications on the 
At-Large list? If one presumes that this is the way for individuals 
with no explicit standing to raise issues with us, the answer is yes. 
But clearly at the moment, some do not even subscribe, and others do 
not  have the stamina or time to go through it all.

In the case of the GNSO and GA list, it is clearly stated that some 
Council members participate, but they are under no obligation to 
participate or respond.

Alan

At 11/08/2008 12:16 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
>ALAC - list for ALAC to do work in public.
>At Large - list for all people interested in At Large issues to talk 
>amongst themselves and with ALAC
>That's my take on it...
>Jacqueline
>Thompson, Darlene wrote:
>>Well, and now after my last e-mail, I'm disagreeing with myself.  We
>>have ALAC Announce for announcements.  So what is the difference between
>>ALAC and At-Large?  No idea whatsoever.  Dang!
>>
>>D
>>
>>Darlene A. Thompson
>>Community Access Program Administrator
>>Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP
>>P.O. Box 1000, Station 910
>>Iqaluit, NU  X0A 0H0
>>Phone:  (867) 975-5631
>>Fax:  (867) 975-5610
>>E-mail:  dthompson at gov.nu.ca
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>[mailto:alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan
>>Greenberg
>>Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 3:46 PM
>>To: alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>Subject: Re: [ALAC] Mailing list duplication
>>
>>You may well be right regarding Internet policy issues in general. 
>>But there will certainly be internal communications for 
>>administrative issues, or ongoing work on a statement being 
>>formulated or discussed that is targeted to a specific RALO).
>>
>>And we need to remember that if a subscriber is flooded with mail 
>>that has no direct relevance to them, they may well just get off 
>>the list. So targeting is important.
>>
>>Alan
>>
>>At 07/08/2008 03:27 PM, Carlton Samuels wrote:
>>
>>>Based on our mandate, I cannot think of any issue important to ALAC
>>>
>>that
>>
>>>would have a specificity of interest to just one RALO.
>>>
>>>This is not to say that every issue will resonate the same for every
>>>ALS.......or even RALO!
>>>
>>>Carlton
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>[mailto:alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan
>>>
>>Greenberg
>>
>>>Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 12:44 PM
>>>To: alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>Subject: [ALAC] Mailing list duplication
>>>
>>>The ALAC and (presumably) the ALAC-Internal list includes the ALAC,
>>>RALO management and ICANN staff.
>>>
>>>The At-Large list is a self-selected list of people which (at the
>>>moment) includes all ALAC members, but not not several of the RALO
>>>
>>people.
>>
>>>The RALO lists include an unknown subset/superset of these same people.
>>>
>>>Somehow we need to rationalize this.
>>>
>>>Some questions that come to mind are:
>>>- Where do we want substantive discussions with users to take place.
>>>- Are ALAC and RALO people obliged to read the At-Large list and
>>>comment when appropriate.
>>>- Should the RALO lists be identified as being exclusively for issues
>>>that are relevant to that RALO only?
>>>
>>>Are there more question that we need to consider.? Are there any
>>>reasonable answers which will allow interaction with people outside
>>>of this lists's members, but will avoid needless cross posting?
>>>
>>>Alan
>>>
>>>PS The issue came up in my mind because I am about to post a message
>>>on the RAA and see no way to hit a reasonable cross-section of people
>>>without cross-posting.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>ALAC mailing list
>>>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.ican
>>>
>>n.org
>>
>>>At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>>>ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>ALAC mailing list
>>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann
>>.org
>>
>>At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>>ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>ALAC mailing list
>>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.o
rg
>>
>>At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>>ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
>>
>

_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac