[discuss] Clarifications on some recent Changes
avri at acm.org
Wed Feb 5 13:56:08 UTC 2014
I for one find the forum a good idea and don't see an issue with logging
in to make comments. Be curious to see if it works. I have started
While I have no problem with the use of mailing lists, especially given
the ability of mail applications to thread subjects, I think trying new
tools is critical. If we want multistakeholder particpation to spread
beyond the few of us who are now engaged, we have to learn how to work
with multiple methods, and need to find scalable methods.
The forum seems a good start. I am sure it will improve.
On the report:
On 05-Feb-14 07:14, Adiel Akplogan wrote:
> A4. The issue was considered in some depth. That is why there are
> four different measures for assessing a particular issue’s overall
> importance to /1net: Importance, Interest, Agreement and Resolution.
> You can find an explanation of each in the summary. The idea is that
> these four factors provide a useful balance across posts.
I like the scheme, but I have questions about the execution.
Who actually made all the judgements. It this something the /1net-SC did*?
Was any consideration given to using online tools to crowdsource these
Is there any dynamic elasticity in these judgements? Can the change over
time? What mechanism is used for that?
* speaking of the /1net-SC:
Does it keep an open email archive so we can all follow along with their
Are the calls recorded and will a way be provided for the rest of the
entity to be able to listen and review?
If we aren't transparent, we doom /1net to becoming yet another
boondoggle in my view.
More information about the discuss