RE: [alac] Why there are chronic delays on mail to the ICANN ALAC list

["Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>]

I am always puzzled when a few people make assumptions about how everybody
else is using a specific tool, and therefore I would like to provide another
opinion, from the "third world" in terms of use of technology (myself!), on
the email issue.

For a number of reasons that are not worthed discussing here, my preferred
way of working is asynchronous. I.e., I connect, synchronize my email, read
and answer when I can, and reconnect to send what I wrote and get the new
mail.
The delay is therefore for me such a big deal, that I have not even noticed
it until this thread was brought up ;>).

Of course, if the majority of ALAC wants to have a change in the way email
is managed, I am sure that Kent will accommodate it. Personally, I wonder
whether we should make a distinction among the different mailing lists, like
the internal ALAC at one end of the spectrum, which is a closed list and
possibly higher needs for fast communication, and the als@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx at
the other end, where there is a large amount of spam and definitively no
need for speed (but still the need for completeness of the addressee list).

Anyway, looking at how technology-savy people in my family (essentially my
teenage daughters) use the net, I wonder whether we are not mixing email
with instant messaging. My daughters are not generally expecting to have a
fast return on their emails, but when they need to communicate in real time
they use a different tool. I wonder whether this should not be the best
approach for us as well.

Cheers,
Roberto Gaetano
ALAC
ICANN Board Liaison
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-alac@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-alac@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Jean Armour Polly
> Sent: 18 October 2006 05:20
> To: kent@xxxxxxxxx
> Cc: alac@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [alac] Why there are chronic delays on mail to 
> the ICANN ALAC list
> 
> Hi Kent-- Thanks for the explanations. We understand that you 
> have a lot of workload on your end. We as ALAC volunteers  
> have a lot to do as well, in addition to our full-time jobs 
> (and in some case, part time jobs, etc). Time is short for 
> all of us. So...rather than look backwards and find all the 
> instances where greylisting has been a problem, let us move 
> forward instead. I think at this point you just need to trust 
> the 15 of us when we tell you that our discussions have 
> indeed been frustrated by the compounding greylist issue.  It 
> has had the effect of dividing us all by yet another time 
> zone. But luckily for us, this is an arbitrary one we can do 
> something about! :-)
> 
> We appreciate your efforts in managing a complex set of 
> discussion fora and the historical background informing the 
> current solutions. 
> We can see how greylisting can be useful on a large list that 
> anyone can join. But ours is a small closed list. Only 
> approved posters can post. You yourself point out that our 
> list traffic isn't burdensome. 
> For us, greylisting is not necessary.
> 
> As our Chair has temporarily handed over her responsibilities 
> to the Vice Chairs, and as Vice -chair of structures and 
> communications,  I speak for ALAC in asking you to make your 
> best effort in a timely removal of greylisting for these two 
> lists. Could you estimate a time frame when this might be 
> accomplished? I apologize in advance if we are asking for a 
> short turnaround on something that is not trivial, but it 
> would be wonderful if it could be turned off in time for our 
> next vote period, which will commence on Oct 26, about seven 
> work days from now.
> 
> Best wishes
> Jean Armour Polly
> ALAC vice chair Structures &  Communications