[H-ADMIN] o'reilly user group emails

[matheist76 at westnet.com.au]

Hi,
I have stressed in the past but I'll stress again the exec list is useful. Example: wiki activation and private emails. With wiki activation anyone within the Exec can authorize a wiki user. So instead of just 1 person being able to authorize new wiki users we have 5 people that can do it.

This has a number of benefits even in the current situation which is where I am the only one authorizing new members (please don't feel that you can't just because I have been given the task).  A good example was when I was first handed the job of doing wiki auths. Russell knew about the request and was able to make sure I did the task assigned. This would not have been possible if the emails were only going to me via my email alias. 

In relation to private emails. My feeling is that all private emails that are sent to members of the Exec about Exec business should go to either the exec list, if private, or the admin list. Especially the ones to the Secretary as they are sure to be such things as that affect the Exec. Of course I would prefer people did send such emails to the admin list but sometimes they just don't want to for their own reasons. 

Now I think Clinton is trust worthy and forth coming but having those emails posted to the exec list is useful. Both from a perspective of this current exec and the ones that come after. A good example is that in his Secretary report at Exec meeting. If he has any private emails that relate to the Exec all he needs to do in his report is just point out that they are on the exec list archive. I did this at the last Exec meeting. This worked out rather well because I could make mention those emails in a public email. All of the Exec had copies and so will the future Execs. 

One argument that was put forward for not keeping a record of emails sent to the Secretary was that amongst those emails there might be negative things said about members of future Execs. To me this is bullshit especially as we are pushing for a more open and accountable Exec. If we can't be accountable to future Execs then what makes us accountable to the current Exec. 

I think if you wish to be negative about people in the membership then either except the futures consequences of you sending the offensive emails. You could instead send them only to personal email accounts or best of all don't make such comments.

Matt.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Russell Stuart" <russell-humbug at stuart.id.au>
To: "admin" <admin at lists.humbug.org.au>
Sent: Monday, 8 February, 2010 2:31:14 PM GMT +10:00 Brisbane
Subject: Re: [H-ADMIN] o'reilly user group emails

On Mon, 2010-02-08 at 14:16 +1000, Clinton Roy wrote:
> O'Reilly currently sends us a once a month email with lots of
> interesting news. It goes to exec, which i think is about to die.

Exec isn't about to die. SysAdmin was under siege because of SPAM.

In the long term if any list doesn't attract much traffic for a year or
so, then as far as I am concerned it should get the axe.  Again SysAdmin
looks to be going that way, but not Exec as yet.

> Should it be redirected to admin or general?

Admin or the Secretary would be the two choices.  I only suggest the
Secretary because I personally have no interest in it.  If that is the
same for everybody else then the secretary would be the best choice.

_______________________________________________
Admin mailing list
Admin at lists.humbug.org.au
http://lists.humbug.org.au/mailman/listinfo/admin