Hi,
I'm more than a month late with my input.
I like using the OLPC guideline as a starting point. I think it has
reasonable, common-sense guidelines for starting and continuing a list.
The OLPC guideline of a minimum of ten initial subscribers seems
reasonable, with one caveat. As I was writing an email today to the
Outreach Committee, which does not have a list, it occurred to me we
have two different types of lists in the Evergreen community. We have
our interest group lists, where people performing the same types of
tasks are asking questions, sharing tips, bringing attention to bugs,
etc. I think 10 is a good minimum for starting interest group lists.
The other type of list is one for a committee or group doing project
work. The web team, DIG, and EOB lists are some obvious examples, but we
also have others like the conference committee list or the eg-sites
list. The eg-sites list is used at the time we select the next year's
conference site and has fewer than ten subscribers, and we may have
other groups like that one that will need to request a list. For those
lists, I think we should employ some flexibility in the minimum number
of initial subscribers.
I also agree we should have a policy for closing dead lists. My concern
is not the number of messages posted in a given year, but whether those
messages are getting attention and responses. IMO, the problem with the
former sys-admin list wasn't so much the low activity, but the fact that
new people trying out Evergreen were posting questions to the list and
getting no response. If a list gets two or three original posts in a
year, but the poster gets answers from those posts, I see no harm in
continuing the list. Likewise, if a list gets 20 posts in a year, but
half of them are legitimate questions that remain unanswered, while
another five are off topic, we might consider closing down the list and
redirecting questions on that topic to the general list.
As an example, the evergreen-reports list has had fewer than 10 messages
over the past year. However, when people post there, they almost always
get an answer. I think 10 messages might be a good threshold to evaluate
whether a lists should be removed, but we might say other factors will
be taken into consideration before a list is closed.
Speaking of closing lists, do you think we should close the Gsoc2012
list? :)
Kathy
On 06/15/2017 12:32 PM, Rogan Hamby wrote:
I would bump the number up higher than 10 but in general I think it
sounds sane. +1
Rogan Hamby
Data and Project Analyst
Equinox Open Library Initiative
phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
email: [email protected]
web: http://EquinoxInitiative.org
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 11:25 AM, Galen Charlton
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi,
Now that the evergreen-acq and evergreen-circ mailing lists exist, I
think we may be in a good place to revisit Kathy's proposal to define
a process for requesting new mailing lists:
http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/2017-April/013854.html
<http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/2017-April/013854.html>
My own feeling is that the OLPC process [1] would be a good basis with
the addition of a policy for closing dead lists. For example, we could
establish a guideline that once a year every list will get checked and
those that have been around at least a full year but have had fewer
than 10 messages during the past 12 months are subject to being closed
up.
[1] http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Mailing_lists#Starting_a_new_list
<http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Mailing_lists#Starting_a_new_list>
Regards,
Galen
--
Galen Charlton
Infrastructure and Added Services Manager
Equinox Open Library Initiative
phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
email: [email protected]
web: https://equinoxInitiative.org
direct: +1 770-709-5581 <tel:%2B1%20770-709-5581>
cell: +1 404-984-4366 <tel:%2B1%20404-984-4366>
--
Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
[email protected]
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier
