[KI-LC] [BoT] Group "Join" Form
Brett McDowell
email at brettmcdowell.com
Wed Jul 1 06:45:49 PDT 2009
Is everyone happy with the word "Follower"?
Brett McDowell | +1.413.652.1248 | http://KantaraInitiative.org
On Jul 1, 2009, at 9:07 AM, J. Trent Adams wrote:
> Roger -
>
> Your edits make sense to me.
>
> Do you want to take a whack at a clean version and recirculate?
>
> Thanks again,
> Trent
>
>
> Roger Martin wrote:
>> Trent,
>>
>> I've been at an off-site all day and am just now getting to my email.
>> See my responses embedded below.
>>
>> rogerM
>>
>> /******************************************
>> Roger Martin, Director of Standards
>> AOL
>> 22260 Pacific Blvd 41A:A03
>> Dulles, VA 20166
>> email: roger.martin at corp.aol.com
>> AIM: rjmartin99
>> phone: 703-265-6203
>> mobile: 703-389-1547
>> *******************************************/
>>
>>
>> J. Trent Adams wrote:
>>> Roger M. -
>>>
>>> This appears to be a great clarification and streamlining of the
>>> process
>>> we were trying to define. I definitely appreciate the time and
>>> effort
>>> you put into carefully preserving the spirit of the prior work,
>>> while
>>> also improving it.
>>>
>>> My nits are so minor I feel embarrassed even bringing them up:
>>>
>>> 1. The term "Intellectual Property Rights" is
>>> introduced earlier than the acronym was
>>> parenthetically defined. Perhaps moving up the
>>> acronym to the first instance?
>>>
>> [RM] oops!! yes, it should be moved up to the first usage
>>> 2. The term "Follower" is now only referenced in
>>> the second bullet of Section (6). Perhaps it makes
>>> sense to eliminate the term from the Definitions
>>> Section (2) and insert the meaning in (6)?
>>>
>> [RM] Good point. I considered this, but decided it was useful to
>> have the definition. In addition, we should change the fourth bullet
>> in (5) to read:
>>
>> * A non-Participant in a Group may subscribe to a Group List as a
>> Follower. A non-Participant Subscriber has read-only permission
>> and may not post to the List.
>>
>>> 3. If we're leveraging defined terms (e.g. Member,
>>> Participant, etc.) from other Controlling
>>> Documents, do we need to formally reference
>>> them in some way? Perhaps by including them
>>> in the Definitions Section (2), linking a reference
>>> to the Bylaws and/or Operating Procedures as
>>> appropriate?
>>>
>> [RM] In the Operating Procedures we defined only those needed terms
>> that had not been defined in the Bylaws. So, I think we should
>> continue that practice. The reason for doing it that way is to
>> prevent future conflicts should we change a definition in one
>> document
>> and forget to change it in another. In the Bylaws we included the
>> following as the introduction to the Definitions in Section 1:
>>
>> /Whenever a term defined below is capitalized, it is used as
>> defined. If the word or /
>> /phrase does not have leading capital letters, then it is to be
>> interpreted within the /
>> /context of the specific text. /
>>
>> /A capitalized term not defined below is used as defined in the
>> Organization Bylaws./
>>
>> [RM] For clarity, we should add the above text to each Policy that we
>> create that includes definitions.
>>> 4. In the same vein, if we're referencing externally-
>>> defined terms, do we need to include the term
>>> "Participant of a Group" in this document? This
>>> seems close enough to "Participant" as defined
>>> in 1.13 of the Bylaws that perhaps we can remove
>>> the qualifying "of a Group" so they're equivalent?
>>> Or is there a subtle difference I'm missing?
>>>
>> [RM] Good point. Let's delete the definition for "Participant of a
>> Group".
>>
>> [RM] However, I think we should leave the usage in the rest of the
>> document because the policy with respect to a Group list pertains
>> to a
>> Participant of that specific Group. Otherwise, if we just say
>> "Participant", then an entity that is a Participant of Group A might
>> think it has the right to have posting permission for the Group B
>> List
>> without having signed the Participation Agreement for Group B.
>>
>>> Let me know what you suggest.
>>>
>>> Thanks again,
>>> Trent
>>>
>>>
>>> Roger Martin wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have spent some time reviewing the "Groups Email Discussion List
>>>> Policy" draft and have rewritten it in what I believe to be an
>>>> easier
>>>> to understand and more comprehensive format.
>>>>
>>>> I have attached my draft which is based on the following comments
>>>> and
>>>> rationale:
>>>>
>>>> 1. The Policy needs to address both (1) Joining a Group as a
>>>> Participant and (2) Subscribing to a List as a Follower. In
>>>> the
>>>> current draft these two concepts were intertwined and seemed
>>>> to
>>>> be fairly confusing. I have attempted to split these two
>>>> concepts out into separate sections to the extent possible.
>>>>
>>>> 2. The introduction of the term "Contributor" is not needed since
>>>> "Participant", which is already defined in the Bylaws, is
>>>> sufficient. I have deleted usage of "Contributor". If we
>>>> wish
>>>> to differentiate between Participants who do and do not
>>>> actually
>>>> contribute postings to the Group List, then the term may be
>>>> useful, but personally I do not believe we should be
>>>> encouraging
>>>> the concept of being a "passive" participant in a Group by not
>>>> contributing anything.
>>>>
>>>> 3. I propose that all Participants in a Group be automatically
>>>> Subscribed to the Group List. If a Member has additional
>>>> representatives who join a Group then they may need to
>>>> Subscribe, but in my opinion the roster of Participants in a
>>>> Group should automatically be included on the Group List.
>>>> Likewise for the BoT and LC lists, those holding a seat on
>>>> either body should be automatically subscribed to both Lists.
>>>>
>>>> I have made other changes to the text as I rearranged it, but I did
>>>> not intentionally change the meaning of the existing text except as
>>>> outlined above.
>>>>
>>>> I apologize that I do not have the document properly formatted,
>>>> but I
>>>> have run out of time and will be in an offsite meeting all day
>>>> tomorrow. As noted in an earlier email, I do not have edit
>>>> permission
>>>> on the online version of the document. I am including it as a
>>>> PDF and
>>>> MSWORD file.
>>>>
>>>> I am sending it in its current state for consideration and
>>>> discussion
>>>> as appropriate.
>>>>
>>>> ...rogerM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Roger Martin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Since I do not have "edit" privileges to the "Groups Email
>>>>> Discussion
>>>>> List Policy" and because I feel that these issues should be
>>>>> discussed
>>>>> by the entire list, I was going to posting my recommended changes
>>>>> (and rationale) to the LC and BoT lists in an email.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, after spending some time on rewriting the policy, I have
>>>>> decided to draft a new version.
>>>>>
>>>>> One of the primary difficulties is that while the title of this
>>>>> draft
>>>>> policy is "Groups Email Discussion List Policy", it actually also
>>>>> includes, and to some degree confuses, the policy about joining
>>>>> a WG
>>>>> or DG.
>>>>>
>>>>> As a result, I am going to propose restructuring it and renaming
>>>>> it
>>>>> to be "Policy for Joining Groups and Group Mailing Lists".
>>>>>
>>>>> I will post it for consideration as soon as I have completed the
>>>>> redrafting of the document.
>>>>>
>>>>> ....rogerM
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> /--
>>>>> ******************************************
>>>>> Roger Martin, Director of Standards
>>>>> AOL
>>>>> 22260 Pacific Blvd 41A:A03
>>>>> Dulles, VA 20166
>>>>> email: roger.martin at corp.aol.com
>>>>> AIM: rjmartin99
>>>>> phone: 703-265-6203
>>>>> mobile: 703-389-1547
>>>>> *******************************************/
>>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> LC mailing list
>>>> LC at kantarainitiative.org
>>>> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/lc_kantarainitiative.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> J. Trent Adams
> =jtrentadams
>
> Outreach Specialist, Trust & Identity
> Internet Society
> http://www.isoc.org
>
> e) adams at isoc.org
> o) 703-439-2149
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Trustees mailing list
> Trustees at kantarainitiative.org
> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/trustees_kantarainitiative.org
More information about the LC
mailing list