RE: Proposal to create Public list for the AB [Was: Re: w3process-ISSUE-104 (AB-transparency): AB should conduct all non-sensitive e-mail on a Public or Member list [Advisory Board]]

Art, and all,

I am ok to conduct as much as possible AB discussions in open manner (who could be against, frankly...).

But lets try to have a structured approach here :
- there is the public process list to deal with process
- there is an AB-only list
- there will be a ab-public list, the one proposed here

Before operating such 3-places conversations - which I suspect will be a nightmare, but that we can face.
1) I would like that we have a clear process clarifying where we AB discussion will happen for each item . My proposal is : all items treated by AB are decided during AB-only discussion on which list it is going to be discussed (to avoid clash, misunderstanding, duplication...). This clarification should be discussed for al topics, except for the process discussions that have migrated in the process mailing list.
2) Did we make a decision that the AB-public list would be member-only or public ?  sorry if I missed something here...

Opinion ? Complementary information ?
>From the public process people, from the AB...

Regards,
Virginie Galindo
gemalto


-----Original Message-----
From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.barstow@gmail.com]
Sent: vendredi 11 juillet 2014 15:20
To: ab@w3.org
Cc: Revising W3C Process Community Group
Subject: Proposal to create Public list for the AB [Was: Re: w3process-ISSUE-104 (AB-transparency): AB should conduct all non-sensitive e-mail on a Public or Member list [Advisory Board]]

On 7/8/14 10:53 AM, Revising W3C Process Community Group Issue Tracker
wrote:
> w3process-ISSUE-104 (AB-transparency): AB should conduct all
> non-sensitive e-mail on a Public or Member list [Advisory Board]
>
> http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/104
>
> Raised by: Arthur Barstow
> On product: Advisory Board
>
> It appears the only e-mail list used by the Advisory Board is a private list that is not accessible to Members nor Public. That list should be used exclusively for "sensitive" information and all other AB e-mail should be moved to a Public list (preferable by me) or at least a Member-only list.

Dear AB,

Apparently, some of you are not subscribed to public-w3process [given the AB's #1 priority is presumably the upkeep of W3C processes, that seems like a bug, albeit the subject for a different thread]. As such, in case you missed it, I raised an issue re AB transparency [1] and it was discussed in thread [2].

In [3], I proposed the AB create a new Public list that could be used for things such as gathering input on AB priorities. Apparently, I was supposed to send that proposal to the AB's private list. Does anyone object to creating a new Public list for the AB (the strawman proposal for the list name is "public-ab")?

-Thanks, AB

[1] <http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/104>
[2] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Jul/0001.html>
[3] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Jul/0012.html>



________________________________
 This message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressees and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited.
E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please delete it and notify the sender.
Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this transmission free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for damages caused by a transmitted virus.

Received on Friday, 11 July 2014 14:20:47 UTC