SPI AGM Notice: 20:00 UTC, Monday 9th July, 2018

MEETING NOTICE
--------------

The Board of Directors of Software in the Public Interest, Inc., will
hold a public board of directors meeting on Monday, 9th July
2018 at 20:00 UTC. This is the Annual General Meeting.

SPI meetings are held on irc.spi-inc.org (the OFTC network), in #spi.
The agenda for the meeting is open for additions and is available at
http://spi-inc.org/meetings/agendas/2018/2018-07-09/

If you need to get an item on the agenda, please contact the SPI
Secretary at <secretary at spi-inc.org>. Agenda items and resolutionsk
should be received 48h prior to the meeting start.

More information on SPI meetings can be found at
http://www.spi-inc.org/meetings/

Valerie Young
Secretary, Software in the Public Interest, Inc.

Hi,
On June 8 Valerie Young sent a meeting reminder to the spi-announce mailing list, linking to the agenda for the meeting. As can be seen in the first attached mail, I replied to her mail asking what "F2F Action Item Review" means. I left the default recipients unchanged, but the sending to spi-announce was rejected by an unidentified moderator who suspected that I meant it to go directly to Valerie, and I had no answer.

I dropped the issue at that point, but yesterday I received the last attached mail, which points to the agenda of SPI's annual general meeting, which has most of its content in a section with the same title.

Can anyone please explain what this title means? And could something be done so that replying to mails sent to spi-announce reaches authors of these mails?

On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 09:04:05AM -0400, Philippe Cloutier wrote:

> On June 8 Valerie Young sent a meeting reminder to the spi-announce
> mailing list, linking to the agenda for the meeting. As can be seen in
> the first attached mail, I replied to her mail asking what "F2F Action
> Item Review" means. I left the default recipients unchanged, but the
> sending to spi-announce was rejected by an unidentified moderator who
> suspected that I meant it to go directly to Valerie, and I had no
> answer.

I am that masked moderator.

> I dropped the issue at that point, but yesterday I received the last
> attached mail, which points to the agenda of SPI's annual general
> meeting, which has most of its content in a section with the same
> title.

"Face to face action item review". Updates on action items that came out
of the SPI face to face (i.e. in person) meeting.

> Can anyone please explain what this title means? And could something
> be done so that replying to mails sent to spi-announce reaches authors
> of these mails?

How about instead of sending mails to -announce you send them to where
you want them to go? I rejected your original mail with a message about
my best guess about where you might want it to go, rather than
incorrectly assuming you wanted it to be private, or public, or go
somewhere else.

J.

--
Revd Jonathan McDowell, ULC | Real Programmers don't drink decaf.

Hi Jonathan,

On 2018-07-02 10:11, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 09:04:05AM -0400, Philippe Cloutier wrote:
>
> [...]
>> I dropped the issue at that point, but yesterday I received the last
>> attached mail, which points to the agenda of SPI's annual general
>> meeting, which has most of its content in a section with the same
>> title.
> "Face to face action item review". Updates on action items that came out
> of the SPI face to face (i.e. in person) meeting.

Thank you

Since this is not the first meeting with content in such a section, if that section shall be featured again (and I am not saying it should), please:

1. At least avoid collapsing with the "F2F" "acronym"
2. Even better, use the description just given by Jonathan (I for one would not have been able to figure out that meaning even if the acronym had not been used.)
3. Ideally, detail when the face to face meeting took place or somehow allow readers to find what action items came out of that meeting.

>
>> Can anyone please explain what this title means? And could something
>> be done so that replying to mails sent to spi-announce reaches authors
>> of these mails?
> How about instead of sending mails to -announce you send them to where
> you want them to go? I rejected your original mail with a message about
> my best guess about where you might want it to go, rather than
> incorrectly assuming you wanted it to be private, or public, or go
> somewhere else.

Yes, thanks, though there is obviously nothing confidential in that mail, so my preference would have been for it to be public.

If replies to mails sent to spi-announce are not supposed to be sent to spi-announce, I would suggest either:

1. Setting the Reply-To to where they should go
2. Having the mailing list set Reply-To to where they should go
3. Indicating where replies should go in the list description

--
Philippe Cloutier
http://www.philippecloutier.com

Philippe Cloutier writes ("Re: Meeting agendas and mails to spi-announce mailing list"):
> If replies to mails sent to spi-announce are not supposed to be sent to
> spi-announce, I would suggest either:

It should be obvious that replies to mails sent to spi-announce should
hardly ever go to spi-announce. You do understand the purpose of an
announcements list ? It should have announcements, not discussions.

> 1. Setting the Reply-To to where they should go

I agree that people posting to -announce should usually set Reply-To.

> 2. Having the mailing list set Reply-To to where they should go
> 3. Indicating where replies should go in the list description

Neither of these is practical, because where the reply should go will
depend on what the announcement was and what the reply is.

Ian.

* Philippe Cloutier <chealer(at)gmail(dot)com> [2018-07-02 18:01]:
> 1. At least avoid collapsing with the "F2F" "acronym"

I removed F2F since it doesn't really matter where the action items
came from.

--
Martin Michlmayr
https://www.cyrius.com/

On 2018-07-04 09:38, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Philippe Cloutier <chealer(at)gmail(dot)com> [2018-07-02 18:01]:
>> 1. At least avoid collapsing with the "F2F" "acronym"
> I removed F2F since it doesn't really matter where the action items
> came from.
>
Sounds like a great solution; thanks Martin

--
Filipus Klutiero
http://www.philippecloutier.com