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

Nat Sakimura sakimura at gmail.com
Thu Aug 13 17:08:59 UTC 2009


One of the reason for "easier" is to fall on the safer side, and that is a
big factor, IMHO. If they do not want the transparency, that is a big issue
to deal with, but I am hoping that it is not the case...
Am I too optimistic?

I agree that there are very few things that we need to conduct in privacy.
The recent development we have been working were one of the exception.
Marketing things would be another.

Board meeting should also be open that anyone should be able to call in,
though probably not allowed to speak :-)

In such an environment, we need a procedure to move into private mode.
It is usually an motion.

=nat

On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 1:57 AM, David Recordon <david at sixapart.com> wrote:

> I actually agree with Chris.  I think that many people choose the private
> list because it's "easier" for a variety of reasons.  We should identify
> those reasons and work to resolve them.  Our default should be public and we
> have remarkably few (if any) NDAs to deal with.
> I also agree that having a simple process to move something started on the
> private list to the public one makes sense.
> --David
>
>
> On Aug 13, 2009, at 9:40 AM, Nat Sakimura wrote:
>
> 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 process.
>
> =nat
>
> 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)
> http://www.sakimura.org/en/
>  _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Nat Sakimura (=nat)
http://www.sakimura.org/en/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/attachments/20090814/c462d425/attachment.htm>


More information about the board mailing list