[ trimmed down excessive CC list ]

My definition of self appointed doesn’t seem to line up with yours.
The task force was appointed by the Executive Board and made up from
members of the community. Can you please elaborate where the “self
appointed” claim is coming from?

I also would like to strongly oppose the notion that such mailing lists
need to be public. The mailing list was a communication tool to form
thoughts and guide discussion towards the goal of the task force. Free
discussions within a task force IMO can only happen when the task force
can openly voice their opinions without thinking about how they are
perceived by a wider public audience. The discussions might as well
exclusively happen in video calls, and I sure hope you wouldn’t
request access of the public to those calls.

In summary: task forces are formed to work out a goal, for which they
require privacy. Minutes of the discussions and regular updates (if
it’s a longer running process) can be sensible to keep the public
informed, but with this task force the final report contained plenty of
information. Additionally, the final report was presented to the members
and there was a vote on the relevant passages, so I fail to see how
damages could be done by this proceeding.

    Marcus

On 7 Nov 2020, at 12:23, Harry Cross wrote:

> I don't agree unfortunately, and I don't think self appointed groups
> within
> the NCC should be allowed to lock themselves away to make decisions
> about
> this sort of thing without some form of scrutiny. The mailing list
> doesn't
> have to be open to all to reply too, but at least to give a live
> overview
> of what is going on.
>
> At the moment it looks like a self appointed group was allowed to make
> recommendations, without any sort of chain of thought being made
> public until after it had happened and the damage has been done. RIPE
> Board, I would like to suggest that a rule is instigated in future to
> prohibit any mailing list being made private (bar anything for the
> members only), so that proper scrutiny of the work of the NCC and it's
> TFs
> can be undertaken.
>
> Thanks
>
> Harry
>
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 7, 2020 at 9:53 AM Cynthia Revström <me@cynthia.re>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> (directed to EB)
>> The archives appear to be gone, this needs to be fixed.
>>
>> (directed to Harry)
>> The doodles were just scheduling times when the TF members were
>> available
>> for calls.
>>
>>> Surely if the membership had requested for this to happen, it makes
>> sense to allow them to be involved in the discussion.
>>
>> This is not quite true, it was the Executive Board who called for the
>> Task
>> Force to be created to write a report of suggested changes that the
>> EB
>> could present to the members for them to vote on.
>>
>>> Some people may not want to commit to a full task force membership,
>>> but
>> still give their view.
>>
>> Sadly I don't think this would have worked at all if it was a public
>> mailing list. We needed a group of people who were invested into the
>> issue
>> and not have a bunch of comments from all over the place.
>> The diversity-tf is/was(?) an open mailing list, that pretty much
>> failed
>> in my opinion due to it, and I think that this TF would have had the
>> same
>> outcome if it was open.
>>
>> -Cynthia
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020, 18:02 Harry Cross <me@harrycross.me> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>> I've just had a cursory glance through the report and the mailing
>>> list
>>> minutes.
>>>
>>> I'd like to ask why the mailing list was not open to all please, I
>>> saw
>>> the minutes mentioned this but there was no explanation of why?
>>> Surely if
>>> the membership had requested for this to happen, it makes sense to
>>> allow
>>> them to be involved in the discussion. Some people may not want to
>>> commit
>>> to a full task force membership, but still give their view.
>>>
>>> I also tried to get to the Doodles and they don't work. Are they
>>> public
>>> at all please?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Harry
>>>
>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> members-discuss mailing list
>>> members-discuss@ripe.net
>>> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/me%40cynthia.re
>>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> members-discuss mailing list
> members-discuss@ripe.net
> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
> Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/lysis%40lys.is

_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
members-discuss@ripe.net
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/me%40cynthia.re