Re: Role of public-xg-lld and public-lld mailing lists

Hi Ray,

On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 06:38:47PM -0400, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote:
> >In short, we stand by our position of using two lists with
> >extensive cross-posting.
> 
> As I've said I support the two-list system (and perhaps I'm the only one 
> other than the Chairs who has said so) but why the "extensive cross 
> posting"?  Why not implement the plan (as I suggested) where administrative 
> matters are confined to the XG list and all substantive content confined to 
> the public list?

I think it would be difficult to decide what should be posted
where, with perhaps one third clearly "administrative",
one third clearly "of general interest", and one third in
the grey area in-between.

With cross-posting, to my way of thinking, we would not need
to worry about that grey area.

Tom

-- 
Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>

Received on Tuesday, 8 June 2010 14:47:01 UTC