- From: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
- Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2015 13:31:55 -0500
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- CC: Daniel Appelquist <appelquist@gmail.com>, TAG List <www-tag@w3.org>, Dan Connolly <dconnolly@kumc.edu>, Dan Connolly <dckc@madmode.com>
On 2/28/2015 9:39 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:> Hi Noah, > The section heading does link to it; maybe that's a bit non-obvious... I guess that to me it was non-obvious. Perhaps found it less so. In any case, thank you for the clarification. Now that I've read it [1], mostly I like it. A couple of brief comments if you don't mind: * From [1] "Likewise, www-tag is not a general Web architecture discussion list." This one causes me some concern insofar as it could be taken to discourage people raising issues that: (a) are not currently up for discussion but that either should be considered, or that might lead later to something of interest to the TAG; or (b) the TAG has put on a "back burner" but in which it retains a long term interest; or (c) brief mentions of the sorts of things the TAG community should know about (e.g. link to FCC ruling on Net Neutrality). I've found all of these to be valuable contributions to www-tag over the years. * I think the TAG traditionally had an email participation policy. I can no longer find the link but if memory serves it included: - Contributions from the public to this list are welcome, but you are expected to research prior discussions of an issue before contributing. That means at the very least looking through archives from the last few months, and if there is indication of older discussion, trying to find that too. If your point has been made before, don't repeat it, or else link the original with a brief endorsement (e.g. +1). - If you have recently contributed more than three times to discussion on a particular issue, consider hanging back. It's not in all cases a mistake or prohibited to contribute further, but likely your perspective has been heard. The chair may ask you to hold off for awhile in which case you must. Both of the above are my paraphrases, and my memory may be faulty. Still, I think policies like these can be helpful in holding down thrashing. I'm copying Dan Connolly, who may remember where the old policy was recorded; there may be other good ideas in it too. Hope this is helpful. Noah [1] https://github.com/w3ctag/w3ctag.github.io/blob/conducttweak/about/tagmlcode.md On 2/28/2015 9:39 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > Hi Noah, > > The section heading does link to it; maybe that's a bit non-obvious... > > Cheers, > > >> On 1 Mar 2015, at 5:11 am, Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com> wrote: >> >> I was just reading the minutes. Overall they're very helpful and well done IMO and seem to capture the discussion sufficiently for non-attendees to follow. However, when there is discussion of things like a draft "mailing list code of conduct" document, it would be very helpful to have a link to the draft being discussed. >> >> <former chair hat on> >> Regarding obligation of TAG members to respond to all discussion on the mailing lists: I don't think it's practical to impose such an obligation on a group like the TAG. The TAG is 9 people, and the potential traffic on the mailing list is effectively unbounded. Responding to all emails, even from very concerned correspondents, is only sometimes (though often) the best use of time IMO. >> >> TAG members are chosen (should be chosen) by the community primarily because their judgements' are respected. Trusting TAG members to make reasonable decisions on when to respond explicitly and when not seems to be sensible. We trust them with many more difficult matters. >> >> I do think it's reasonable to expect that at every posting to www-tag will be read or at least skimmed by at least one TAG member. I would expect that to happen naturally in most cases, but for a long and difficult discussion the chair(s) might assign a few people to relieve other TAG members of the need to read everything. >> <hat off> >> >> Thank you! >> >> NOha >> >> On 2/26/2015 4:19 PM, Daniel Appelquist wrote: >>> Please find the minutes from today’s call posted here: >>> >>> https://github.com/w3ctag/meetings/blob/gh-pages/2015/telcons/02-26-houdini-minutes.md >>> >>> (Feel free to make pull requests if you see errors.) >>> >>> Thanks! >>> Dan >>> >>> >>> >> > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > >
Received on Sunday, 1 March 2015 18:32:17 UTC