Saori: is it ok to contact people directly by email? >> aye, PMC agrees
Google Groups – discussion on group privacy settings
Frank: Google groups represents distribution lists. As members join the group, I ask for their permission to add them to the google group. Emails that are sent get published to that group. Anyone can email that google group. Only the owners of the group can add users to that list.
In legacy groups the goal of Google Groups was to create transparency by making the data public. People can post new topics publically. Membership is private.
Each group can decide if they want to be public or private
Action:each WG owner to check permissions in their Google Groups
Participants: there should be a human touch to onboarding, a welcome email sent and some questions asked (which company, interest in FDC3, etc) – goal is to get the community engaged and contributing
Organizational participants: there is value in saying what it means for an org to be participating members and to have representative in those organizations. Should this be a privileged status? Should we look at participation metrics to establish status? We can participants to opt their organizations into FDC3 when joining. To establish FDC3 standards, we need organizations championing them. Status should not be used to self-promote commercial services.
Committer: the role may be a little vague at the moment, but we want to show level of participation