This should probably be generalized to include RALO officers as has been our practice.
More recently, we have included past ALAC members if they chose to be included. I think that was a very good move. The only question is whether they should all be included in the Internal list. I haven't checked what the current practice is, but I suspect that there is little harm. I presume that if there were anything really confidential, it would be dealt with by directly addressed mail and not a list. Or we could add yet another ALAC-Confidential list which is really just ALAC. But I suspect the usage would be so small as to make it not worth while.
Do we also include Committee/WG chairs in the regular list? Internal?
1 Comment
Alan Greenberg
This should probably be generalized to include RALO officers as has been our practice.
More recently, we have included past ALAC members if they chose to be included. I think that was a very good move. The only question is whether they should all be included in the Internal list. I haven't checked what the current practice is, but I suspect that there is little harm. I presume that if there were anything really confidential, it would be dealt with by directly addressed mail and not a list. Or we could add yet another ALAC-Confidential list which is really just ALAC. But I suspect the usage would be so small as to make it not worth while.
Do we also include Committee/WG chairs in the regular list? Internal?