Re: [seul-edu] Managing the coalition--responsibilities

[Doug Loss <drloss@suscom.net>]

Roger Dingledine wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 03:03:54PM -0500, Doug Loss wrote:
> 
> > Each member group would be expected to join a coalition mailing list
> > devoted to its primary purpose and subscribed to by similar groups.
> > Again, at least one but potentially as many as would like to may
> > subscribe from each group.  These mailing lists would be the primary
> > means of inter-group communication.  They may be augmented by IRC
> > channels, weblogs, etc., but the mailing list would be a minimum
> > requirement.
> 
> This part I disagree with. It violates my "no extra bureaucracy"
> principle. We should let people organize and talk among themselves however
> it suits them most. If they choose to start a mailing list once they've
> got the momentum for it, that's great too. But we shouldn't require more
> layers of indirection.
> 
Perhaps it could be better defined, but I think it's important that
member groups take part in communications with similar groups.  If you
let people organize and talk among themselves, some groups will do just
fine because there will be one or two "sparkplugs" who take it upon
themselves to get things going, while others will never start talking. 
Think where this group would have been if we didn't already have a
mailing list to start this discussion.  Would it have ever occurred? 
Setting up mailing lists is easy and has very little cost in resources. 
If they don't get used, too bad.  But having them going in is a big
benefit, not an added layer of bureaucracy.  And having at least one
group member subscribed to the mailing list as a condition of group
membership doesn't strike me as majorly bureaucratic either.

Doug Loss
dloss@seul.org