Re: Draft GR for permitting private discussion
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Jul 2012, Michael Gilbert wrote:
>> Knowledge of that requirement would simply lead to more sanitized
>> subjects lines in most cases. Although those lacking that knowledge
>> may be in for a surprise.
>
> If the subject lines were sanitized, then they would cease being
> useful, and all the public mailing list would know is that the CTTE
> was having a private discussion on some topic.
>
> If that's what is wanted (something that I don't personally have a
> problem with), we should just require that of the CTTE.
Correct. The intent was just to increase some transparency by making
the number of private discussions a public matter. The subject
suggestion was something I thought up quickly, but other
solutions/approaches are likely better.
Best wishes,
Mike
Reply to: