[Top] [All Lists]

[ontolog-forum] Re: Ontology: Active vs. Observer

To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "Peter P. Yim" <yimpp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 12:34:51 -0800
Message-id: <3E7F6BEB.8090707@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Good question, Dean. I'm sure there are others in the community who 
might like to know too ... therefore, I am replying to the entire list 
(hope that's OK with you.)    (01)

Ref the invitation back in September 2002 for everyone to join this 
forum, it merely stated:    (02)

* If you choose to participate, indicate whether you expect to be
an active member (with voting rights) or merely an observer (no
voting rights).  Observers will be encouraged to participate in the
discussion but will not be expected to take responsibility for
critical path activities.
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2002-09/msg00000.html#nid012    (03)

Therefore, to more specifically answer you, this is how I feel. Of 
course, being an open community, the group here makes it's own rules.    (04)

1. We are hoping that everyone (both "active members" and "observers") 
in the community will contribute ... by being a part of the community, 
   giving everyone their insights, voicing their opinion, and taking 
up community tasks and responsibilities when they choose to do so.    (05)

2. Experience or level of expertise (in the related subject matters) 
is NOT a criterion for "active" or "observer" membership status.    (06)

3. I would think that the bulk of the community decisions are reached 
by consensus. But, there will be ones that need to be decided through 
the process of voting. And, at those points, only active members' 
votes would count.    (07)

4. For the time being, what delineates "active" members would be their 
"rights" (to vote on community issues) and "responsibilities" (that, 
by implication, if they take on certain tasks, especially those on the 
critical path, the rest of the community can rely on them to deliver.)    (08)

5. Participation in projects (the UBL-Ontology project, is, for the 
time being, the only one being discussed) is NOT limited to any 
particular class of membership. Being proactive and responsive, are, 
obviously, necessary conditions to participation, though. Everyone, 
both active members and observers are encouraged to participate.    (09)

6. Participation in conference call, again, is NOT a requirement by 
virtue of membership class. Especially, when we have recognized the 
fact that not all members can participate in those calls, and have 
made it a point to only transact business over the e-mail forum (and 
NOT over the conference calls.)    (010)

 > Suggestions?    (011)

Therefore, if you want to influence the direction and actions of this 
community, and is willing to take on responsibilities, please declare 
yourself an "active" member. I shall look forward to you, and others, 
to so indicate.    (012)

--    (013)

Dean Black wrote Mon, 24 Mar 2003 00:50:40 -0800:
> Hi, Peter.
> Could you refresh my memory on the difference between active member 
> and observer for the Ontology list?  I signed up as observer ...  but
 > since I am actively interested in the UBL ontology project
> and following the posts, maybe I should be active?  I don't think 
 > I'll be able to do many (if any) of the conference calls, though.
 > Suggestion?
> Thanks!
> Dean Black    (014)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/  To Post: 
mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (015)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [ontolog-forum] Re: Ontology: Active vs. Observer, Peter P. Yim <=