Most team members have responded so I will summarize and make recommendations.
From: Patricia Earnest
Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2013 12:11 AM
I do have some thoughts on this matter, but am just back from Seattle & need some time to mull. What comes to mind initially is that since most TF mail also goes to mi-ep, is there any reason to add folks to both? Is JeffCo willing to be part of the TF, or are they already, just by virtue of what they represent?
Janet's point is well taken... Is our process of interest or our decisions? Wording this thought differently, might it be better to send most our "lurkers" a distillation or decision track, rather than our repeats? If someone, like Rita in this case, with many years of advantageous experience, is interested in being a "lurker," that is whom I'd agree to put on the "read only" list.
We may find that we should have a "marine division" for Marty so that we also can "lurk" on his correspondence as well as he on ours. I think he should be on miep/marine.
I say Jeffco has no reason just to lurk on our matters. When information should be sent to that entity, it will be.
How does that sound? Hmmmm, Perhaps I've mulled enough...
On Jun 7, 2013, at 11:35 PM, Pete Hubbard wrote:
Currently, neither list is “read only”.
1. We have invited anyone to post to the email@example.com list via this notice “Preregistration is required because space is limited. Interested sellers should send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org to reserve your space and/or to ask any questions.” In this web page - www.miep.us/home/annual-yard-sale
2. We have invited anyone to post to the email@example.com list via this notice “(Post a msg to our mailing list with suggested changes/improvements. Pete)” in this web page www.miep.us/taskforce.
[mailto:MIEP-TF@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of kurt steinbach
Fine with me too. However, I would not want to add many lurkers to our subscribers list. I say this only that I do not want to add more voices of partial participants to our business conversations. These lurkers should have “read only” access until they are fully integrated into the business of either MIEP or MIEP-TF, or both.
From: Janet and/or Willi
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 6:11 PM
From my perspective being subjected to lots of emails doesn't sound like a way to get people to step in, but maybe some people like that sort of thing. Please make sure they have an idea of the number of emails per month on average. (a count of some of the miep letters in my inbox for May exceeded 50)
On Jun 7, 2013, at 11:06 AM, Zimmerman, Mike (PARKS) wrote:
Fine with me and sounds like a good way to break in.
Fort Flagler Area Manager
From: MIEP-TF@googlegroups.com [mailto:MIEP-TF@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Pete Hubbard
Most of our
I just talked with Rita Kepner about her interest in joining our MIEP Team. She said she may want to in the future.
I asked if she might be interested in being a “lurker” on our 2 mailing lists and she thought that would be a good idea. I said I would ask you if that was OK with you. Is it?
Might we want to invite others to lurk like Marty Loken, one of the DEM officers (http://www.jeffcoeoc.org/contacts.htm), ?