[discuss] Updated Web site

Wed Feb 5 02:53:42 UTC 2014

Apologies...meant to say "too much power" instead of "too much party" - the
dangers of multitasking


On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> P.S.  Did the "Steering Committee" approve this shift?
>
> PP.'S.  Will more than a few members of the Steering Committee ever come
> play with us?
>
> There are a few challenges with creating mechanisms to encourage
> discussion leading to productive output.. If we constantly have to ask the
> steering committee to guide us as we innovate then we are in danger of
> giving them too much party. I do not imagine the Inet to desire to be
> another bureaucratic machine but rather a space for dialogue. The steering
> committee should also have clearly defined roles and should guide. There
> are two ways of looking at the initiative to come up with the changes and
> they are:-
>
> 1)taking initiative and being innovative
> 2)dictatorial in telling the community
>
> I am inclined to believe that the spirit behind the new forum discussion
> board is (1) but without a doubt, the Steering committee and the
> administrative staff will learn that things have to be communicated to
> avoid misconception and we can also be generous in allowing room for people
> to take initiative and ownership. I would assume that they are open to
> receiving volunteers who can plan and discuss avenues to make comms easier.
>
> Live and let live :)
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Shatan, Gregory S. <GShatan at reedsmith.com>wrote:
>
>> So instead of monitoring one messy mailing list, we'll need to monitor a
>> dozen forums (fora)?  Not sure which is the more productive of two evils.
>>  A single "general discussion" forum with properly displayed threaded
>> discussions might be better, rather than balkanizing us at this point.  I
>> think the cross-pollination here has some positive effects.
>>
>> Maybe a single "board' wouldn't scale as well, but I don't know whether
>> scalability is a key premise for 1net.
>>
>> I suppose we will learn to adapt.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> P.S.  Did the "Steering Committee" approve this shift?
>>
>> PP.'S.  Will more than a few members of the Steering Committee ever come
>> play with us?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: discuss-bounces at 1net.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at 1net.org] On
>> Behalf Of Andrew Sullivan
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 8:14 PM
>> To: discuss at 1net.org
>> Subject: Re: [discuss] Updated Web site
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 10:22:11PM +0400, Adiel Akplogan wrote:
>> > On 2014-02-04, at 22:06 PM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > > Does this mean that to send remarks to the discussion, one needs to
>> > > log into the forum?
>> >
>> > Yes Andrew that is what it means. Thanks.
>>
>> I see others claim not, and apparently my message got through, so I'll
>> try again this way until it fails.
>>
>> I just went to the forum (perhaps amusingly, attempting to get to
>> http://1net.org simply timed out) to see whether there were things I
>> didn't see in my INBOX.  The only thing I could see was a note about
>> website support and suggestions (none of the discussion I saw on the list
>> today was there, for instance).  I didn't log in or create an account.  I
>> sure hope one doesn't need to log in to read posts in the forum.
>>
>> For what it's worth, I think the chances that I'm going to go to some
>> special web forum to have any kind of discussion on any topic are pretty
>> near zero.  (I have occasionally, when forced to do it, used such forum
>> systems for technical support.)  I already have far too much volume of
>> communication, and there is little chance I'm going to learn a new
>> interface just for this purpose.  There are doubtless people who will be
>> delighted that I've at last gone quiet, so at least that goal will have
>> been achieved.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>> --
>> Andrew Sullivan
>> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at 1net.org
>> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>>
>>                                                                 * * *
>>
>> This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered
>> confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it
>> in
>> error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by
>> reply
>> e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy
>> it or
>> use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other
>> person. Thank you for your cooperation.
>>
>>                                                                 * * *
>>
>> To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we
>> inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal
>> tax
>> advice contained in this communication  (including any attachments) is not
>> intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1)
>> avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state
>> and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to
>> another
>> party any tax-related matters addressed herein.
>>
>> Disclaimer Version RS.US.20.10.00
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at 1net.org
>> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140205/56114c17/attachment.html>