|
Due to numerous
comments on this listserv, please re-read the email below. It generally applies
not just to Business Issues but to all the SNIP listservs. In particular
the second paragraph regarding listservs are the opinion of the participants
and NOT official positions or recommendations of WEDI
SNIP.
Thanks,
Lin Quinkert
-----Original Message----- From: Zon Owen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 6:28 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; McLaughlin, Mark Subject: SNIP Listserv Usage & Etiquette Guidelines Importance: High Aloha!
(A) Some Notes on WEDI SNIP Transactions Workgroup
Listserv Usage
We need to clarify the purpose and proper use of the various
listservs established to support the WEDI SNIP Transactions Workgroup and its
numerous subsidiaries. I have volunteered to write some
general guidelines and run them by the BI SWG so that we can get some
feedback on them during Tuesday's conference call. At this point, I will
describe them very informally. After discussion I can recast them in a
briefer and somewhat more prescriptive format.
First, all listserv discussions are to be understood to
be the opinions of the participants, and not the positions or
recommendations of WEDI SNIP. Those wishing to
receive a formal or official response should submit their questions via the SNIP
Issues Database (IDB) process. In some instances, it might make sense to
post a question to the Transactions WG listserv for general discussion
first, and only use the IDB for critical items that cannot be adequately
addressed in that forum.
Next, we need to clarify that, within the Transactions
Workgroup, only the Transactions WG listserv is intended as an open forum.
Postings to all subordinate listservs should be relevant to the specific
activities and work products of those subgroups. [This is a substantive
clarification for me, and probably a helpful one as well. I know that
I have not understood it to work this way in the past.]
Postings to multiple listservs within this workgroup are to be
mildly discouraged, but not forbidden. Use your judgement on this.
The presumption is that all SWG and WPAG members are also members of the
Transactions WG listserv, so that a single posting there will reach
everyone within that WG who wants to hear about it. For example, both the
Transactions WG and the BI SWG listservs now have nearly 1,000 members, and it's
probably pretty much the same 1,000, so you shouldn't need to hit on both of
them at once. And people should also be able to follow a specific
issue, such as a single white paper development effort, without getting
inundated by messages on numerous other issues.
Also give some thought as to whether a given posting really
needs to go to everyone on a listserv, or if it could just go to the person you
are responding to (e.g., the "I agree." or "Thanks!" or the "But what about
XYZ?", where only the answer would be of interest to the whole
group.).
(B) Some Closing Thoughts on Listserv
Etiquette
Personal criticisms and venting of frustrations
("flaming") should be avoided, regardless of who is doing it.
Listserv discussions should be limited to defining the issues, and to
identifying both the merits and the weaknesses of various proposals for dealing
with them. They should not disparage or ridicule the opinions of
other participants. If your point isn't getting across, try a different
way of describing or expressing it. If people still don't "get it", let go
of it. Avoid lectures.
If you feel that you simply must challenge someone's judgement
on a somewhat personal level, do so one on one, and not on one of the
listservs. And don't insist on a response; we should all have the
right to ignore things that we don't want to hear about. And, if you think
that you have been unduly abused or offended on one of our
listservs, complain to one of our cochairs, and not to the whole
listserv.
Finally, repeated and substantive transgressions of these
guidelines could result in the loss of listserv privileges. We are all
presumably adults, professionals, etc., and hopefully we will never need to
exercise this prerogative. But the effectiveness of a group can be placed
at risk when a few people make consistently poor choices in these matters, and
the affected group needs to have some way of dealing with that.
So, what do you think? Does this stuff make sense?
What would you add or remove? And what else can we do to improve the value
and effectiveness of our listserv discussions?
- Zon Owen -
BI SWG Cochair
(808)597-8493
To be removed from this list, go to: http://snip.wedi.org/unsubscribe.cfm?list=business and enter your email address. The WEDI SNIP listserv to which you are subscribed is not moderated. The discussions on this listserv therefore represent the views of the individual participants, and do not necessarily represent the views of the WEDI Board of Directors nor WEDI SNIP. If you wish to receive an official opinion, post your question to the WEDI SNIP Issues Database at http://snip.wedi.org/tracking/. Posting of advertisements or other commercial use of this listserv is specifically prohibited. |
