next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects [Comments at end]. On Mon, 8 May 2000, David L. Potter wrote: > The design of the IP registration process most recently in use, included > considerable interaction between the editors and the IP to ensure that the > IP was sited properly within the Community. 'Editors' were able to work > with the IP to slot them in the right category, identify suitable names for > the mailing lists, confirm that they had the necessary technical skills to > establish the website, etc... <snip> > Recent Events > ====================== > > It has recently come to light that several weeks ago, a significnt change > was made to the IP registration/creation process. > > This basically involved discontinueing the use of the IPDB, and registering > IP's as individual users with filespace allocated under the 'home/' tree > with urls in the form of: > > http://chebucto.ns.ca/~HAPCS > > rather than > > http://chebucto.ns.ca/Technology/HAPCS > > > *** > At the same time, the office stopped notifying editors about the > receipt of IP agreements. > *** > > These changes have several administrative and technical implications. For > one, the integrety of the IPDB has been weakened without a suitable > replacement identified... and further that this change was 'silent', > there was no announcement. > > An urgent requirement to implement a new registration process seems > to be the justification for making these changes without first obtaining > consensus from the IP and Technical committees. > > However, no request for specific improvements to the process/IPDB were made > prior to the changes and the 'silent' nature of the changes could be > viewed as an attempt to conceal these events for as long as possible... > Although I came away from the a meeting last Tuesday with the impression > there had been a 'flood' of IP's signed up, it appears as if only 4 new > accounts (with an income of $175) were created in the two weeks before these > changes came to light. > > --- > > In previous correspondence to the CCN board I have described these events > thus: > > "The recent changes to the IP registration process were arbitrary and flawed > in process, they seem to reflect questionable technical judgement, and > evidence a lack of regard and consideration for other stakeholders." > > --- > > I believe that these events run counter to the long tradition of full > discussion and concensus building that has served as the foundation for > the CCN decision making process. > > I hope that the board will review these events and take this opportunity > to clarify the expectations with respect to discussions and consensus > between staff, volunteer committees and the board, and between individual > boardmembers with overlapping areas of interest/responsibility. > > Although I probably represent the lunatic fringe in this matter, I would > urge anyone with an interest in these matters to make their opinions and/or > concerns known to the board as a whole or individual board members. To elaborate on some of the important points brought up here by David Potter, it occurs to me that for those people sitting on the sidelines wondering "What earthly difference does it make what technical approach we take to managing our IPs?" ;-> that a little clarification might prove useful. What is the IP Database? It is a synthetic piece of software (created largely by David Trueman and Gerard MacNeil) working hand-in-glove with the Group Editor, the User Database, the Notes Database, etc. which is a centralized source for information which pertains to Information Providers. What Does it Do? It allows Editors, IP Volunteers and others who have some interest or need to answer questions like: * Who are the editors of an IP website? (check the composition of the edit group.) * Who is in charge? (look to see who the IPE1 is.) * What majordomo lists are associated with the IP? * What is the contact address, phone, fax, etc. of an IP organization? * Who signed the IP Agreement? * What is the status of an IP? (active, withdrawn, moved, in progress, etc.) * How do I add/delete an editor to the site (follow the gateway into the group editor). * Where are the directories of an IP situated? * What is the home page of an IP? * What is the jumpkey of an IP? * When was an IP created? Need to create an IP (to fast-track an application; create a test or 'internal IP; a CAP site, etc.)? The IP database gives one this functionality. These are all fundamental aspects pertaining to IP administration and to the relations between CCN volunteers (like the CCN Editors). Having this functionality available allows CCN volunteers to access fundamental information about IPs and to engage in meaningful relations with the IP editors, working with them to sort out problems, and assisting them in their legitimate requests. One can search the database in various ways to (for instance) find IPs that are in process, find IPs for whom all IP editor accounts have expired (and take some remedial action), take effective steps to close sites and create re-direct pages for IPs that have moved their sites, and deal with a plethora of administrative on-going issues that characterize our relations with IPs. Who can Use it? Anyone. Board Members, Office staff, CCN volunteers, Technical People, etc. Any bona fide CCN volunteer with a legitimate need or desire to help in this area can be given HTTP authorized access and use the Database. I'm not sure how many current people have such access (David Murdoch could probably supply a number) but I'd guess that it is in the order of two to three dozen people. What does it represent? Those new to the CCN may not be familiar with how much thought, consultation and work went into creating the IPDB, not only as a piece of software in and of itself, but because it represented a key CCN principle: the involvement and enfranchisement of CCN volunteers in meaningful roles in relation to the functioning of the CCN. It empowers people by giving them direct access to information and the ability to take meaningful roles in relation to managing the IP sector and processes. It enshrines the principle that the CCN will be a community and membership focused organization where volunteers make meaningful contributions and take appropriate decisions. The notion in creating it was not that such knowledge and responsibility would lie solely with administrative staff. Expediancy was not the only value considered in designing this approach. Now, under the current proposals, all of this functionality will become lost to CCN volunteers and will be controlled solely by ... whom? It appears that it will become exclusively the province of office staff. The IP Database (and associated software) are very useful, very empowering, very enfranchising, and imper