[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [Ampu-dev] New site sections
From: |
Stover, Michael |
Subject: |
RE: [Ampu-dev] New site sections |
Date: |
Wed, 06 Mar 2002 11:38:33 -0500 |
So whether private forums are used the way we approve of or not is a matter
of configuration. Gotcha.
However, it also brings up a point that if a public forum "decides" to
initiate a new private forum, someone has to have the rights to do it.
Either that, or it needs to be a special kind of "solution" such that, if
it's voted for, the system automatically creates the new private forum.
That sounds ugly, but the alternative is to have a forum administrator that
is trusted to carry out the wishes of the voters in the forum.
-Mike
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lee Braiden [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 11:32 AM
> To: AMPU Developers' List
> Subject: RE: [Ampu-dev] New site sections
>
>
> On Wed, 2002-03-06 at 16:12, Stover, Michael wrote:
> > My thought was that only the Taskforce activities would
> need to be private.
> >
> > [snip] In the public forum,
> > an initiative is proposed (ie we need to make a bid for
> contract X). In the
> > forum itself, it is decided that the bid needs to be secret
> >[snip]
> > It's only for this particular
> > decision. So, there aren't private forums "sitting out
> there" unaccounted
> > for, and becoming a member of a secret taskforce is a matter of open
> > discussion.
> >
> > -Mike
>
> No, no confusion there. I understand the point you're making, but I'm
> just expanding the idea, to cover the full range of related
> scenarios.
> I'm a minimalist, so I try to look for a generic solution
> that will kill
> lots of birds with one stone =).
>
> What I'm thinking is that if we allow private use of the
> system at all,
> then we should cover the entire concept of a corporation which desires
> none (or almost none) of it's internal work to be publicised in any
> form. I think it's a valid thing to allow, if a little
> unsavory, since
> organisations do practice such things, and they do need to remain
> involved in larger communities. One thing's for sure, we
> won't get big
> corporations to fully adopt the system's philosophy if we exclude them
> right at the beginning =)
>
> --
> Lee Braiden,
> AMPU Team
>
> "coding a better government"
> http://www.freesoftware.fsf.org/ampu/
>
> ICQ: 24346459
> AIM: FallibleDragon
>
- [Ampu-dev] New site sections, Lee Braiden, 2002/03/05
- RE: [Ampu-dev] New site sections, Stover, Michael, 2002/03/06
- RE: [Ampu-dev] New site sections, Stover, Michael, 2002/03/06
- RE: [Ampu-dev] New site sections, Stover, Michael, 2002/03/06
- RE: [Ampu-dev] New site sections, Stover, Michael, 2002/03/06
- RE: [Ampu-dev] New site sections,
Stover, Michael <=
- RE: [Ampu-dev] New site sections, Stover, Michael, 2002/03/06
- RE: [Ampu-dev] New site sections, Stover, Michael, 2002/03/06