[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