Re: Membership Committee Mailing List Archives

[Behdad Esfahbod <behdad behdad org>]

On Mon, 2006-07-10 at 14:34 -0400, David Neary wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Baris Cicek wrote:
> > Today Behdad asked about why private list like membership-committee
> > mailing list is public. 
> > 
> > We're using this list for asking information about applications, and
> > even though vast majority of the responses are positive, there can be
> > negative ones as well. 
> > 
> > For that reason, it's not good to make them public which might affect
> > honest responses from reference people. My own opinion is to keep dialog
> > about applications to be private. But I would like to know if there're
> > some concerns related with decision. 
> > 
> > Any applicant whom his/her application is denied can easily ask the
> > reason, and we can show it. Even with private list, we can keep
> > transparency. 
> 
> I feel strongly that the membership list should be public. Applications,
> and the reasons for their rejection, should be visible to all.

I just find it awkward to have a private list with public archives.  By
"private", I assume subscription to the list is by not available to
public.  But on the other hand, AFAIU posting to the list is open to
public, and the archives are public.  So, by making subscription
private, you are just making one's like harder to follow the list: they
have to poll the archives, instead of receiving new mail to the list in
their mail box.


> The reference mails can perhaps go off-list, but honestly I can't think
> why that might happen - in general, if you're replying it's to give a
> good reference, and if the reference would be bad, you don't reply.

Others have already raised issues with this scheme.

> Cheers,
> Dave.

-- 
behdad
http://behdad.org/

"Commandment Three says Do Not Kill, Amendment Two says Blood Will Spill"
        -- Dan Bern, "New American Language"