[OpenID board] Usage of the Public and Private Board Mailing Lists

Nat Sakimura sakimura at gmail.com
Thu Aug 13 16:40:40 UTC 2009

I disagree. I think they are
resorting to private list because they are not sure if they can talk
that in public (e.g., due to NDA constraint etc.) Having a rigid
process up front will remove that uncertainty and expedite the


On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Chris Messina <chris.messina at gmail.com>wrote:

> Adding more bureaucracy will definitely not help things. I imagine that
> people are resorting to the private list because they want to limit
> discussion and avoid protracted squabbling.
> What would be better would be to develop a set of community guidelines that
> would help non-board-members more effectively participate in the board at list. That is, if you want to contribute to the board list, you should be
> talking about something real or concrete, and not abstract or theoretical
> (just for one example).
> If the tool that we have for convening dialog (namely the public mailing
> lists) are not serving people's needs, and they're resorting to other
> channels, we should try to understand what about the current tool is failing
> them — rather than trying to introduce new rules that require enforcement
> and therefore some kind of new discipline.
> We started writing up a document for this purpose:
> http://wiki.openid.net/board-private
> It needs to be expanded, and we need to continually harass those who choose
> not to abide it — if indeed there is no other excuse for them resorting to
> the private list other than laziness or ... force of "habit".
> Chris
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:42 PM, Nat <sakimura at gmail.com> wrote:
>> What about making the motion to conduct the conversation in private list
>> and only when accepted can proceed.
>> So the thread in private list always start from a motion. It should
>> include the sunset for the thread as well.
>> =nat at Tokyo via iPhone
>> On 2009/08/12, at 8:39, David Recordon <david at sixapart.com> wrote:
>>  While this was a hot topic of discussion around the Board election almost
>>> a year ago, we as an organization seem to have slipped back into a pattern
>>> of using the board-private mailing list in many situations where it is
>>> unnecessary to do so.  I would like to see us discuss our existing
>>> board-private usage policy (http://wiki.openid.net/board-private) in an
>>> upcoming Board meeting, evolve it if necessary, and ultimately have the
>>> current Board ratify an appropriate policy.  Not only is this important to
>>> myself, but members have also expressed concerns multiple times over a lack
>>> of transparency within the Foundation.
>>> The current policy states:
>>>> The board-private mailing list is a hidden mailing list for conducting
>>>> certain types of sensitive conversations pertaining to the responsibilities
>>>> of the OpenID Foundation and its board. The list should be used sparingly
>>>> and only under certain circumstances.
>>>> New issues should be submitted to the public board mailing list, and
>>>> ongoing updates about its pending resolution should be made public. The work
>>>> to resolve an issue may be best be kept to the board-private list.
>>>> Dick Hardt provides the following examples of private conversations:
>>>>   • Executive Director candidates and their status while recruiting and
>>>> negotiating with them. Often people are employed somewhere else, so public
>>>> disclosure is inappropriate.
>>>>   • Recruitment of new corporate board members. Companies will usually
>>>> want to (or for compliance, may have to) control disclosure of joining the
>>>> OpenID Foundation. It may be part of a larger strategy that they want to
>>>> control the disclosure of.
>>>> These conversations are examples that should be kept to public mailing
>>>> lists:
>>>>   • OIDF is looking for a new ED, a new ED has been hired
>>>>   • OIDF is recruiting additional corp board members, a new corp. board
>>>> member has joined (but not to be disclosed until they are ok with it)
>>>> Martin Atkins has said that "there is a standing policy that everything
>>>> sent to the private list must begin with a justification for it being
>>>> private. Other board members can and often do reject these justifications
>>>> and the discussions move to the public list."
>>> Thanks,
>>> --David
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> board mailing list
>>> board at lists.openid.net
>>> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board
>> _______________________________________________
>> board mailing list
>> board at lists.openid.net
>> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board
> --
> Chris Messina
> Open Web Advocate
> Personal: http://factoryjoe.com
> Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/chrismessina
> Citizen Agency: http://citizenagency.com
> Diso Project: http://diso-project.org
> OpenID Foundation: http://openid.net
> This email is:   [ ] bloggable    [X] ask first   [ ] private
> _______________________________________________
> board mailing list
> board at lists.openid.net
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board

Nat Sakimura (=nat)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/attachments/20090814/734eb88a/attachment-0002.htm>

More information about the board mailing list