Internal communication & group dynamics

MD Maïa Dereva Public Seen by 435

The EAC comes from a first group with people who met each other in real life. But new commoners will surely and regularly join the "virtual" group. It could be important and interesting to think about tools to help people to know each other, and to encourage the group dynamics. For example a welcome area, a who's who,...


Maïa Dereva Sat 23 Jul 2016 1:52PM

Hi @gaelle11 , in the "Outreach communication" topic you wrote "we should bring the discuss to the mailing list".
Are you talking about the CommonsWatch mailing list?
Isn't it a good idea to create a different mailing list dedicated to EAC issues?


Gaelle Sat 23 Jul 2016 4:33PM

Yes I talked about the mailing list:
[email protected]
It's the one we created right after the meeting in Villarceaux for this group, where everybody is subscribed.


Maïa Dereva Sat 23 Jul 2016 5:01PM

Thank you @gaelle11 :smiley:
So, is EAC the new name for CommonsWatch or a new group with different or specific goals?


Frédéric Sultan Sat 23 Jul 2016 5:06PM

Yes @maiadereva there is a collection of short biographies collected when people register in the list of discussion. The page is in wiki.remixthecommons.org. I can share it later. It will be pushed in the wiki of ECA when it will be created.


Maïa Dereva Sat 23 Jul 2016 5:19PM

Yes, I know the page @fredericsultan : http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php/CommonsWatch
Good idea to push it in the future wiki.
Can you explain me the difference between EAC and CommonsWatch ? Can we say that EAC is a kind of sub-project of CW ?


Gaelle Sun 24 Jul 2016 2:37PM

Yes it's the name that people choose after the meeting in Villarceaux. Several days after we had the list working already that's why we have commonswatch as the list and EAC as a name ;-)


Maïa Dereva Sun 24 Jul 2016 2:49PM

Great! Thx for the answer :thumbsup:


sophie Sun 25 Sep 2016 12:14PM

hey... the pirate party Amsterdam wants to sign. Are we letting local political parties sign? What do people think?


Nicole Leonard Sun 25 Sep 2016 2:40PM

Just from a logistical perspective, it might be hard to monitor who signs and so we have to think carefully about the "rules" we craft to legitimate it all. As @davidhammerstein has maintained, it's important we are pluralist and not officially aligned with ANY political party. So, it might be a good idea in fact to have a rule saying we don't display signatures from parties. But on the other hand, in the name of transparency and accessibility and seeking to unite different bodies around the commons, it might be worth leaving it open. I think we could add a disclaimer along the lines of "we don't affiliate or represent any parties, but we don't stop anyone from signing"


Maïa Dereva Sun 25 Sep 2016 3:08PM

I agree with Nicole proposal to add a simple line like "we don't affiliate or represent any parties" and I would use a positive way to say "we don't stop" => "Everybody is free to sign"

Load More