Well, good to know the path is identified.

Given the volume of work being done and the genuine need to prevent volunteer exhaustion, can the case be re-made? Or is it a dead end? Not quite fair that ICANN deems it suitable for staff but not the rest of the community.

- Evan
On May 21, 2020, 8:23 PM -0400, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>, wrote:
Ha ha! Welcome to the party. The TTF have been trying to get Slack support for years! I tried for just the CCTRT and failed and ICANN staff actually USE it. Sigh.

Jonathan Zuck
Executive Director
Innovators Network Foundation
www.InnovatorsNetwork.org


From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Evan Leibovitch <evanleibovitch@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2020 5:20:59 PM
To: Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net>
Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [CPWG] About Single Subject Meetings
 
Much as I usually loathe solving human problems with tech solutions, this may be an appropriate time to suggest such a path.

I hated Slack(*)... until I was forced to use it regularly in some organizations in which I participate. It acts like a Skype that's fine tuned to organizational use with easy creation of ad hoc subgroups and the ability for participants to come and go at their own pace. Furthermore, real time chat now is great for diverse time zones and handles threads better than email. When properly used, chats can be where the preparatory work is done, leaving calls for decision making and when diversity of feedback is more important than focus.

- Evan

(*) while I have a Slack account for some orgs, my day job uses an open source Slack workalike called Mattermost. Other options such as Telegram and Microsoft Teams also exist. What I mean is that I'm suggesting more use of an organizational chat system but am not trying to push any one version or vendor.