Re: [UG-ADMINS] What about making this list public on https://www.mail-archive.com/

One thing to note is that the only discussion that the list has seen in months (prior to this vote) would not have happened had I known that the list archive was publicly available on php.net. Additionally, discussions on handling money, concerns about sponsors, issues with speakers, etc. would also be topics that it would be good to have a safe place to discuss, but should not be in a publicly searchable location. While I understand the idea that open source projects should be open, are user groups really an open source project? 
Beth



Beth Tucker Long
Treeline Design, LLC
807 Arbor Vitae Place
Verona, WI 53593
608-770-6677
http://www.TreelineDesign.com

> On Jan 30, 2016, at 21:57, Eric <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> -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