[discuss] Clarifications on some recent Changes

Wed Feb 5 13:56:08 UTC 2014

Hi,

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 
doing so.

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 
appraisals?

Is there any dynamic elasticity in these judgements? Can the change over 
time?  What mechanism is used for that?

thanks

avri

* speaking of the /1net-SC:

Does it keep an open email archive so we can all follow along with their 
considerations?

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.