[Architecture] Techniques for effectively using our mailing lists (was Re: Communication between Matchmaker and PCP)

Tsakou Gianna gtsakou at singularlogic.eu
Tue Apr 29 04:34:46 EDT 2014


I fully agree with Colin and Antranig. And I think we need to adopt and reinforce this open discussion approach in Prosperity for All as well. By reinforce, I mean that all project teams working on a topic SHOULD post on the relevant list their working discussions (and not only the results of their discussions, unless there is a very specific topic that can be taken off line). Posting only the results of a discussion on the list makes other interested persons unable to contribute and, in the worst case, forces them to agree to a result that they would rather form in a different way simply because it is too late to re-discuss it. BTW, I am afraid that the latter is an approach we are taking in P4A and it is a bit worrying...

We should also make sure that all necessary teams are included in the relevant list(s). Subscribing to a RELEVANT for their work list should not be an option.

We probably need fewer lists in C4A so that it is clear which list to address each time (as a recipient or cc) and avoid including 2-3 lists in the same email.

Just my thoughts on the subject.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: architecture-bounces at lists.gpii.net [mailto:architecture-
> bounces at lists.gpii.net] On Behalf Of Antranig Basman
> Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 12:59 AM
> To: architecture at lists.gpii.net
> Subject: Re: [Architecture] Techniques for effectively using our mailing
> lists (was Re: Communication between Matchmaker and PCP)
> Thanks for your response, Gregg.
> My view is that we require the transparency that one or more public lists
> provide, and need to set a clear
> expectation that our work is done such a venue by default - unless there
> are specific reasons justifying why
> a particular communication is better made privately.
> I know that all of us are suffering from overflowing inboxes, but
> unfortunately the ability to monitor
> multiple feeds of information, skimming for relevance if necessary and
> applying filters to organise the
> information as appropriate, is one of the requirements for those aspiring
> to any kind of managerial or
> coordinating role in a technical project. This goes through doubly for a
> project such as ours which is
> entirely supported by public funds and has a mission to serve the public
> in general. We are being paid
> specifically to maintain our technical and coordination material in a
> public way.
> Our architecture list, by the standards of any comparable open source
> project, has extremely low traffic -
> perhaps it averages one or two posts per day. In general it carries
> information that every member of our
> communities should be interested in - even if necessarily there are some
> messages which are more specific to
> one or another of our subprojects.
> As an example, the thread "What do new contributors and implementers need
> to know" between Justin Obara and
> Tony Atkins earlier this month is a perfect example of a conversation that
> every member of our communities
> should be aware of.
> http://lists.gpii.net/pipermail/architecture/2014-April/subject.html
> I disagree with the suggestion that we avoid circulating discussion to
> lists (such as this one) by default.
> Cheers,
> Antranig
> On 28/04/2014 14:11, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
> > Hi Colin,
> >
> > This causes other problems — but lets take this off list and come back a
> the resolution.
> >
> > Other’s with thoughts keep posting them — and/or send me an email to
> join this discussion and i’ll plug you
> > in to it.   Taking it offline because it may be more complicated and a
> short call to discuss and problem
> > solve might be in order.
> >
> > Will wait a few more days for any other thoughts — or people who want to
> join — and then have a call
> > including both the Cloud4all and Prosperity4All communication committee
> members as well.
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > gregg
> >
> > On Apr 28, 2014, at 2:58 PM, Colin Clark <colinbdclark at gmail.com
> <mailto:colinbdclark at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Gregg,
> >>
> >> I’d suggest that we try to avoid placing too many restrictions on our
> use of the mailing lists. In
> >> general, we want to encourage people to use the mailing list for any
> and all project-related
> >> communication. I worry that having complicated formal policies will put
> a damper on that. It would be
> >> great to try to keep it simple and encourage people to use their mail
> program’s filters to appropriately
> >> sort traffic.
> >>
> >> I have found that addressing emails to certain people and CCing the
> list is a very effective technique. In
> >> particular, this technique helps recipients understand when a topic
> needs their attention, while still
> >> allowing the community follow along. This is crucial for the lazy
> consensus that is so important to a
> >> healthy open project—people should be able to follow along with the
> decision-making process, and then only
> >> need to respond if they have a concern or issue.
> >>
> >> http://en.osswiki.info/concepts/lazy_consensus
> >>
> >> In general, the approach we’ve taken on the architecture list--and
> which I hope we can foster more broadly
> >> across the GPII, Cloud4All, and Prosperity4All--is roughly this:
> >>
> >> * if you are sending a general post that you want everyone to look at
> and consider, send it TO the mailing
> >> list
> >> * if you are having a smaller group discussion, but want to ensure that
> the rest of the community is able
> >> to follow along, address it to individual recipients and CC the mailing
> list
> >> * then, only in rare cases, you might send an off-list mails to a
> private group and summarize the results
> >> later
> >>
> >> This works well for people who have set up sensible mail filters for
> the lists, which is very important
> >> for participating in the projects without having your inbox swamped.
> Filters are part of all modern email
> >> clients, and they make it easy to move list messages into a dedicated
> mailbox for periodic consultation.
> >> From there, it’s easy to ensure that any emails that are addressed to
> you, or contain your name, or
> >> contain a topic keyword that you’re interested in, remain in your inbox
> for quick response.
> >>
> >> Another important technique to help people filter out the signal from
> the noise on a healthy mailing list
> >> is to always ensure that the subject line remains accurate and up to
> date. If a conversation started about
> >> one topic and then shifted to another, it’s very helpful to change the
> subject line or start a new thread.
> >> You can see how I’ve done exactly this for this thread, updating the
> subject line to summarize the current
> >> discussion.
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >>
> >> Colin
> _______________________________________________
> Architecture mailing list
> Architecture at lists.gpii.net
> http://lists.gpii.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
SingularLogic-Disclaimer Notice

Η επικοινωνία αυτή ενδέχεται να είναι εμπιστευτική. Σε περίπτωση που δεν είσαστε ο συγκεκριμένος παραλήπτης, σας ενημερώνουμε ότι απαγορεύεται οποιαδήποτε διανομή, αντιγραφή ή χρήση της επικοινωνίας ή/ και των πληροφοριών που περιέχονται σε αυτή. Σας παρακαλούμε να ενημερώσετε κατάλληλα τον αποστολέα και να σβήσετε ή να καταστρέψετε τυχόν αντίγραφά της.

This communication may be confidential. If you are not an intended recipient please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it, is prohibited. Please inform the sender appropriately and delete or destroy any copies of it from your system.

More information about the Architecture mailing list