Efficiency vs Deluge
I see since 2015-09-28 00:00 (never mind which time zone) 223 messages (and counting) of which 5 are from me (I think :-)-O) and 4 came in during me writing this :-)-O This is not going to work. How are we going to get this to work? Somehow we must start focusing on a single issue and bring that one to a conclusion (before we start with the next one) And how are we going to do that? At the moment I only see one solution, Co-Chairs propose one issue, the plenum of members and participants consent, if we can't get consensus, we have a consensus call among the members. If we get consensus we appoint someone (Bernard Turcotte?) "moderator", to read each incoming message and if it pertains to the subject matter, re-post (forward) it to the list with a subject line consisting of one (several) key words, the name of the poster and the original subject line, ore some other method to allow access or even filter the messages on poster and keywords. That way we still have the deluge, for everybody to read but if we want can focus on the mails only pertaining to the matter at hand. Any better proposals will be greatly appreciated. el -- Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar) el@lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell) PO Box 8421 \ / Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/
This is somewhat similar to the design teams approach that we took on the CWG, but we split issues out into mailing lists so that people could concentrate on various issues at hand. -JG On 30/09/2015 14:49, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Dr Eberhard W Lisse" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of el@lisse.NA> wrote:
I see since 2015-09-28 00:00 (never mind which time zone) 223 messages (and counting) of which 5 are from me (I think :-)-O) and 4 came in during me writing this :-)-O
This is not going to work.
How are we going to get this to work?
Somehow we must start focusing on a single issue and bring that one to a conclusion (before we start with the next one)
And how are we going to do that?
At the moment I only see one solution,
Co-Chairs propose one issue, the plenum of members and participants consent, if we can't get consensus, we have a consensus call among the members.
If we get consensus we appoint someone (Bernard Turcotte?) "moderator", to read each incoming message and if it pertains to the subject matter, re-post (forward) it to the list with a subject line consisting of one (several) key words, the name of the poster and the original subject line, ore some other method to allow access or even filter the messages on poster and keywords.
That way we still have the deluge, for everybody to read but if we want can focus on the mails only pertaining to the matter at hand.
Any better proposals will be greatly appreciated.
el -- Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar) el@lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell) PO Box 8421 \ / Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/ _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Ok, so we have a moderated new list to which only the moderator can post (filter) but everybody can read and we make sure that someone puts all stuff pertaining there (while leaving the original mail on the main list)? That would work for me. el On 2015-09-30 15:56, James Gannon wrote:
This is somewhat similar to the design teams approach that we took on the CWG, but we split issues out into mailing lists so that people could concentrate on various issues at hand.
-JG [...]
participants (2)
-
Dr Eberhard W Lisse -
James Gannon