On Wed, 7 Nov 2001, Madhu Menon wrote: > I strongly suggest we don't try and "enforce" anything, apart from general > mailing list etiquette. We could publicise the format on thelist, and maybe +1 > Nah, people have jobs to do and at any given time, a person may not be free > for this. He may perhaps be free to do it the following week. That's why > I'm suggesting that we not make *one* person responsible, but a team of 4 > or 5 people in each section. That way, the probability of *all* of them > being choked with work gets reduced. I'm sure we have enough members with > expertise to make this small number. Plus it works well as a marketing tool > when you say something like "XYZ is one of the guides to HTML on evolt.org, > a community of web developers." And lastly, unlike membership to, say, the > admin group, this does not need extraordinary privileges and hence > screening for acceptance to the guides group need not be as strict. If a > person is inactive for a month or more, he/she gets dropped. Simple. modularity is a great thing, especially when it comes to people resources. i think this is the best way to handle the idea myself.. .djc.