[OSGeo-Conf] Re: [Foss4g2011-private] Website manager position...

[Seven (aka Arnulf)]

He,
my fault. Sorry for the confusion. We seem to have been using the 
"wrong" list. It is definitely too late for me to think coherently=?!

Trying anyway:

This is the public FOSS4G list and it has 56 subscribers. I had 
forgotten because it is not being used:
http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/foss4g2011/

I wonder what conf dev is for (88 subscribers)? Jeff, can you help here?

Let us use this FOSS4G 2011 list for most everything:
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2011

Use the private list in emergency cases[1] only:
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/admin/foss4g2011-private
Peter (aka The Local Team Chief) decides who is on it, Jeff and Tyler 
have to be on it as they are OSGeo representatives.

Best regards,
Arnulf

[1] What is an emergency case:
* Something in the team is really amiss.
* The budget breaks.
* Platinum sponsor freaks out about something.
* Folks don't pay.
* Someone says bad things about FOSS4G but we first want to discuss 
before we officially react.
* If you are certain that what you say will offend someone (I should 
always use this list).
* Nothing else.


On 01/15/2011 01:45 AM, Tyler Mitchell wrote:
>  > Please go to the public list:
>  > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>  >
>  > On conf dev we have 88 subscribers. And every now and then a
>  > mail to
>  > OSGeo discuss is in order too. Especially if you need
>  > enthusiastic
>  > volunteers.
>
> Thanks for bumping it to a more populace list. If you have particular
> expectations from the LOC on communication with the various lists,
> please lay them out so we aren't guessing. It's not too clear. I'm so
> heads-down with limited cycles so easily don't miss the 30k ft view.
>
> Is conference_dev for public discussion or should foss4g2011 (non
> -private) be used? How do we keep from groaning under the weight of due
> diligence by having multiple lists to manage while just trying to get
> tasks done? Finding a medium balance would be nice - e.g. forwarding to
> public lists as required, etc. Or using public as main, and private only
> when required. Not sure on what's been done before, so please spell it
> out :)


-- 
Exploring Space, Time and Mind
http://arnulf.us