Hi,
There's a few questions embedded in this proposal.
First, we have to differentiate between language- and region-based lists, with regions being defined by geography and language.
As someone who has spawned more dead-on-arrival lists than most, I'm apprehensive about two things:
creating lists for a perceived gap which ultimately die
creating lists that siphon off discussion from existing lists
In terms of languages, I don't know enough about the critical mass, but I would assume there is more than enough of a base for an ES list, at the very minimum. And PT_BR is obviously another solid option.
The problems become a proliferation of lists that someone, say, who is an ES speaker *should* sub to. Now it's @global-south, plus the ES list, but then what about the regional question.
I would prefer to open more spaces than to think what they *should* do.
Then the regional lists which should also be set with the respective language. But the regional list would likely be less of a Tor usage discussion than an organizing list, I'd guess.
Language lists are primarily meant to provide a channel for non-English speakers, to state the obvious.
I'm thinking very much out loud here. I worry about a proliferation of lists which take away from the main channels for discussion.
The idea is to open space for discussions that are not currently happening the main channels, such as other mailing lists or IRC channels.
I'm supportive of creating new language and/or regional lists, the relevant people from those groups need to consider the utility in terms of audience and purpose. Think technical discussion versus organizing. If there's an ES list, it should likely be software-focused, since it's the language issue that's being approached. It can assist ES-speakers in LATAM, EU and beyond. But a regional list (which should be designated with the respective language) is more likely an organizing tool.
An ES list that goes into the organizing specifics of a local event in LATAM will only make ES speakers not from the region yawn.
Sorry if I seem to be dancing around the issue here. I think articulating "for whom" and "about what" for a list is vital. Dead lists help no one, and lists that just put more on the plate of a few Tor people need to be avoided.
Maybe it makes sense to start with an ES list and see how it goes?
Yes, thanks for all the feedback. I think we could perfectly use a localized list as a support, discussion and organizing tool. But we really don't know if we don't try, so let's see how it goes :)
Mailing lists are often chicken-and-egg problems... if you don't have the list, you don't recognize there's an audience.
On 04/06/2018 07:10 AM, Vasilis wrote:
Since the global-south name is horrible and we have never gone into the process of changing I guess it will make sense to rename the list (and the IRC channe) and then announce it to the world as the LATAM Tor mailing list?
I agree that the name "global-south" is suboptimal, but we've had multiple conversations about this (I think you've been there for at least a couple of them), most recently discussions in Rome, where the rough consensus was that the name is problematic but less problematic than other choices and there isn't a better option that's widely recognized. So it's not exactly true that no one has gone into the process of changing it...it's been discussed in every meeting I've been in related to global south initiatives.
Am I incorrect to think that @global-south list is really LATAM anyways?
We should probably move towards a LATAM list to replace @global-south. It *seems* to be what the list is in practice. And maybe sticking to some combination of language- and region-specific lists is the right direction.
g
Saludos. --i