Re: [Fsfe-uk] List Descriptions..

[Alex Hudson]

On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 09:54 +0100, Graham Seaman wrote:
> In practice I think the above is still the way things are. At the moment
> we have threads about how the AFFS is organised  running on FSFE-UK
> while Alex has started another thread about the  AFFS website on
> AFFS-project.  

Hmm. We did originally start the AFFS-Project mailing list, because some
people didn't want to see AFFS business discussed on FSFE-UK :)  (At
least, at the time, there was a group of people who said that there was
a need to have AFFS-specific discussions away from FSFE-UK, and leave
FSFE-UK to general discussion of free software in the UK).

> So members have to be subscribed to both lists  to follow
> everything, which seems  to me  to be  a tactic which will lose people.
> I had hoped we could change that.

Well, you know, we can change it :) 

I'm not sure if there is a consensus on what we should change it too,
though :)

There are two problems people are trying to address here, I think. The
first is that people feel committee isn't open enough. That's fair
enough, and I don't think there's much disagreement about this.

The second is, what is the right place to have these kinds of
discussions? We have:

      * affs-ctte. Not the right place, because it's private.
      * FSFE-UK. Not the right place, because it would be using a
        general FS mailing list for AFFS-specific work
      * AFFS-Project. Not the right place, because few people are
        subscribed
      * A new list. Not the right place, because no-one is subscribed :)

Now, clearly, one of these places has to be the "most right". I would
argue that it's AFFS-Project. The fact that we're having this discussion
on FSFE-UK shouldn't alter what is essentially a more long term
decision; it's about where we kick off discussion in the future. 

I guess it comes down to this: AFFS-Project is the right place if we
want somewhere which is run by AFFS and has a specific AFFS remit.
FSFE-UK is the right place if we want an immediately broader
subscribership and people here are happy with that arrangement.

Does this make sense, or am I missing something? :)

Cheers,

Alex.