On 07/30/2015 09:16 AM, Carol Willing wrote: > On 7/30/15 9:13 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: >> On 30.07.2015 18:11, sheila miguez wrote: >>> I'm +1 since other organizer groups do it and because there isn't years >>> worth of private history. In mailing lists with years worth of private >>> history, I'd be -1. >> +1 as well. > > +1 as well. Public archives are a valuable resource for sharing > knowledge with *potential* group organizers.
+1 also. It seems like the majority of the discussions on this list could be made public. It would also be nice to have a place to discuss matters that should remain private, but that seems like a secondary need. Personally, I usually feel more comfortable discussing sensitive matters in private chats rather than email lists. > >> >>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Brian Ray <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> -1 >>>> >>>> I am not sure I agree with the change in the setting for group >>>> organizers >>>> as we may want to discuss things we (as group organizers) want to >>>> discuss >>>> with other group organizers before proposing to a public forum. >>>> However, I >>>> would love to hear what others think. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:32 AM, sheila miguez <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I've wanted to provide links to posts for people multiple times >>>>> now, and >>>>> can't. > > -- Trey Hunner http://treyhunner.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 490 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <https://mail.python.org/mailman/private/group-organizers/attachments/20150730/95f27ca8/attachment.sig> _______________________________________________ Group-Organizers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/group-organizers
