[H-GEN] Reasons why the current Private Lists should remain Private

Russell Stuart russell-humbug at stuart.id.au
Thu Sep 17 19:57:56 EDT 2009


Before getting into specifics here, I'd just like to make the point that
opening the Exec list doesn't mean there won't be private emails.  When
it comes to electronic communications we are one of the most connected
peoples on the planet.  I am personally contacted in private via IRC,
Jabber, MSN, private email, SMS, phone and of course in person at
meetings about humbug business, and I could not change that even if I
wanted to.

The proposed change is therefore rather small.  The easiest means of
communication is via the Exec list, and currently that is private.  That
means by default, the Exec does it business is done in private, out of
the sight from the members.  My proposal is simply to change that
default to a public venue, where all members can see how the Exec is
running the club.  It won't mean the end of private chats between the
Exec, and it won't mean the end of private emails to the Exec - simply
because quite apart from anything else, that is impossible to stop.

On Fri, 2009-09-18 at 02:40 +0800, matheist76 at westnet.com.au wrote:
> Reasons why the both list should remain private:
> 
> 1. By having a private lists for Exec and Sysadmin this
> allows members to more openly express opinions and ideas.

Translation: the cliques/cabals can talk about club business more freely
if nobody can see what they are saying.  This is true.  It's just I
don't think it is a good thing.

I don't see the Exec as above everyone else, making decisions on their
behalf.  I see the exec as a group of idiots who volunteered to take on
the day to day work of ensuring the club runs - booking rooms,
processing email, handling the money and so on.  It really is boring
job.  Humbug has so few members that we can implement democratic ideal -
all members can be involved in all serious decisions.  To do that they
must be able to keep themselves informed on all Humbug business.  That
means wherever practical, there must be no discussions going on behind
their back.

> 2. It provides outsiders with an easy way to contact the 
> right group of people and to do so privately. There might 
> be issues that involve people, clubs etc that shouldn't be 
> made public due to privacy or issues that should be made
> world readable because they might have a negative impact on 
> the club.
>
> 3. Personal and private details can be passed on to the 
> right people without fear that they become world readable.

Brad also raised this issue with respect to SysAdmin, and of course I
addressed it in my original proposal.  Brad is right - there must be
some solution for this put in place before the lists are opened up. 

Fortunately there a whole pile of solutions available to us.  Gpg
encrypted email, email sent to an individuals mailbox, a real letter.
If indeed it must remain private, any of these solutions are better that
sending it so a server situated somewhere in the US that archives the
email in the clear forever more.  In this respect the old email alias
solution was better, as it was much more secure mechanism.

> 4. There are records kept of the emails and the members of 
> the list can go back and take a look at what happened. At 
> this moment they are viewable by Exec and our System Admins.
> If the lists become public what will happen to these records?

Err, nothing.  They remain where they are now, viewable by the Exec.  I
think my proposal implied that.  It is probably worth noting for 15
years Humbug Exec's apparently didn't think it is was worth archiving
the old Exec emails at all.  That only started 4 months ago.  I am not
saying it was a bad decision, but one needs a sense of proportion about
the importance of this issue.

> By this I mean do the Exec still have access to the old 
> private records and if this is such an issue then surely it 
> indicates that there have been issues that have been dealt 
> with in the past that have required a private list.

That is a bit of a circular argument, Matt.  Effectively you are saying
"since I created a private list, surely it means I must need it".  I am
using the word I loosely, of course.

> 5. If something should be made public then by all means send
> to general or announce. Having a private lists doesn't prevent
> things sent to the private list from being made public as 
> they can be easily CC/forwarded to the general list if and 
> when required.

Moving everything to general was one of my proposals.  Given that
general is very quiet, and I think this would liven it up.  In fact I
say there is clear evidence from the occasions I have moved discussions
to general that is does live it up considerably.  Consequently I am
quite partial to the idea.  Unfortunately, you and others argued this
would create too much noise on general and announce.  *shrug*

> 6. More hands make light work. In other words it pays to have 
> more than one trusted Humbug member knowing about issues, even
> private issues, and then being able to act on those issues.
> Whether it be fixing an alias, dealing with private 
> correspondence, activating a wiki account or knowing that there
> is mail in our PO Box. By having a number of trusted members
> increases the chance of a job getting done.

It seems you are saying if more people can see the emails less will help
out.  Sorry, I don't understand how that could possibly be so.

> These are mail box notification, discussions on topics like
> room bookings and dealings with UQ in particular ITS, wiki 
> account creation. Also Private and public requests from 
> groups and companies which have included spam requesting 
> that we put ads up on the wiki. 

That sounds like something the members should know about to me.  Maybe
we should be accepting those requests if we are offered money.  At the
very least, the membership should be aware of the proposals and we
should have a discussion about it.  As I an ordinary member, I
personally would have been very interested to know what organisations
were asking us to put up ads.

> If we allowed the wiki account creation notice to go to a 
> public list there would be issues in so far as anyone could 
> get accounts. At this point companies that have put in the 
> ad request simply would put them up. We would lose control 
> over our own wiki.

Matt, are you should be aware by now Humbug is literally crawling with
SysAdmin's who can solve this issue.  And there are any number of
solutions.  One solution would be to have the Wiki email all of the Exec
privately.

> The way it stands now any one of six Exec members can activate 
> an account. The chances of all of the Exec not being online 
> and unable to deal with the activation is very slim. 

You've raise an important issue.  Doing this on a "whoever notices the
email first basis" is not a good idea.  We will formally allocate
responsibility at the next committee meeting.  I'll put it on the
agenda.

> I have three major problems with this. 
> 
> 1. If the Secretary is away or is simply not doing their job 
> then nobody knows.
> <snip>

I am not going to address this in detail, Matt.  I agree if people don't
do their jobs, things break.  That's life.  I'll point out though that
while making the lists public doesn't prevent people from doing their
job, it does let the membership see what is going on.  This is one of
the way's I am trying to reduce the changes of things breaking.

As for the specific issue of emails to the Secretary being lost - this
is easily resolved.  Make it a IMAP mailbox.  It would make life easier
for the secretary actually, as at meetings he could his report could
consist of the emails in the mailbox, and then he could move / delete
all the ones that have been dealt with.

>  Anything that the greater Humbug should
> know should have already been posted to general.

Like requests to put up ads, for instance?




More information about the General mailing list