Why is this list closed?

[Martin Atkins]

I've heard from a few folks that this list is not open to all to join.

Any particular reason why? Can we open it up?

It's not very good perception-wise, aside from anything else. Plus, I'd
love to hear feedback from as many people as possible; currently I'm
getting feedback on atom-syntax because that's open, but of course that
fragments the discussion.

[Chris Messina]

The list is moderated for a couple reasons.

First, it's early, so I like to know everyone who's joining. By limiting access to folks who specify their interest, I know that everyone here gets that this group is about a spec -- and not just talking about lifestreaming apps or software -- and can help set their expectations.

Occasionally folks join who have specific contributions to make and I like to personally welcome them.

Initially I kept the group totally closed, focused only on implementors (i.e. folks who had sites that published activities) but over time opened up the list for anyone to read.

In the lists that I've started and maintain (OAuth among them) I find that this initial hurdle not only keeps out spammers, but also increases the quality of participation and helps to introduce people to the list.

We recently switched OAuth moderation off and moderate first posters, but I find this much less satisfying as I have less visibility into who is joining and what their interest is.

I intend to continue moderating group membership until we hit around 500, then we can consider moving to open membership.

Chris

--
Chris Messina
Citizen-Participant &
 Open Web Advocate-at-Large

factoryjoe.com # diso-project.org
citizenagency.com # vidoop.com
This email is:   [ ] bloggable    [X] ask first   [ ] private

[Chris Messina]

Oops, I mispoke.

The content of the list is now publicly viewable. I thought I'd done that before -- my bad.

Now only membership is moderated.

Chris

[Martin Atkins]

Please see:
http://intertwingly.net/blog/2009/01/08/Atom-Media-Extensions-for-Activity-Streams

I'm happy to continue accepting feedback on atom-syntax, but I assume
folks here would like to see the feedback too.

I think excluding Sam Ruby and Dare Obasanjo is a mistake, and just
creates a perception that we're not interested in feedback from the
community.

> factoryjoe.com <http://factoryjoe.com> # diso-project.org
> <http://diso-project.org>
> citizenagency.com <http://citizenagency.com> # vidoop.com
> <http://vidoop.com>