Re: [UG-ADMINS] [VOTE] Move to a private life off of php.net

[email protected] (Eric) Sat, 30 Jan 2016 19:57:53 -0800
Newsgroups	ug.admins
Message-ID	<etPan.56ad8641.973cb3.684@DiegoDev>
-1

Haven’t heard enough of an opinion to sway my initial gut reaction to keep the list public. I think the benefits of keeping our discussions open outweigh the scenarios where people would be more comfortable talking behind closed doors. 

This discussion alone is a perfect example of that, where leaders of groups that extend beyond our world of PHP may be struggling with similar issues, and we are able to be a resource for them to make decisions that will strength their communities and teams. 

That coupled with the mere fact we are talking about doing no vetting of such a private list, and anyone can join it seems to invalidate the entire effort and may even lead to situations where there is a false sense of privacy when discussing topics. 

-- 
Eric

twitter: @shocm | @sdphp | http://www.sdphp.org
No trees were killed in sending this message, but a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

On January 30, 2016 at 6:43:17 PM, Ben Ramsey ([email protected]) wrote:

On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 6:23 PM, Beth Tucker Long <[email protected]>  
wrote:  

> Where do you think it would be appropriate to discuss more sensitive  
> ug-leader issues, like the member issue I brought up recently or  
> disciplinary issues?  


Unfortunately, I don't have a good answer for this. I do understand the  
need for privacy in discussing sensitive issue. I'll keep thinking and try  
to propose a solution for this.  


> Also, people keep saying they are voting against this because they don't  
> want to membership restricted, but I haven't seen anything proposed that  
> would restrict membership to the list. Did I miss a message that brought  
> that up?  
>  

Unless I've missed something, I haven't seen anyone say they thought  
membership would be restricted. By my count, there have only been three -1  
votes, and one of them was mine. In summary (and maybe I'm misrepresenting  
folks's concerns, so I apologize), here's what has been said in opposition:  

- Lorna said "open signup and obvious link to php.net are both very  
valuable IMO"  
- Mike Stowe said "I believe transparency is key, as well as the  
openness of the group"  
- I said "I think open source communities should remain open and  
transparent"  

Eric voiced concerns, but has not yet cast a vote.  

All other votes have been +1 or +0 (an acknowledgement but not a strong  
opinion either way).  

-Ben
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 490 B)