[New-imc] process question

[Tony]

Hello Sheri and all

Just managed to go through my backlog of e-mails! and this one from 
Sheri is important as to the amount of mails we are recieving. I 
think we have to be more clear about what each list is for - as i 
went through "process", "communication" and "new-imc" - i find 80% 
are the same mails repeated - which ends up hiding the few important 
ones on those lists.

We are struggling under the global e-mail deluge to ever get a responses out!

Can we not define this list "new-imc" as the place to raise questions 
if an application needs more discussion. It would encourage more 
participation on this list and would cut the posts to "Communication" 
and "Process" drastically!

We could put a call out to Communication saying all those imc's that 
want to keep an eye out can do so on this list. I don't think we need 
one person from every imc. As long as the initial automatic request 
goes to a list like process or communication then everyone should 
then discuss further on this list (as they do now but they just also 
cc and discussions go on everywhere)

cheers
a drowning tony

>hi everyone,
>
>so when we're posting the final application to the communication and 
>process list and asking for feedback.  where should those comment 
>go? to new-imc, to communication, to process, cc'd to the local 
>lists? to all of them?
>
>i think we should be focussing this final application stage on one 
>list.  i've expressed my commitment to imc-communication.  we 
>currently are sending them to process and communication.  but if 
>there is feedback and comment, i don't think having emails 
>cross-posted is an effective practice and something we're trying to 
>steer away from.
>
>thoughts?
>
>sheri