Fwd: list SURA-ITCOM: List Message Rejected

From: Susan Paraska (susan.paraska@oit.gatech.edu)
Date: Fri Jun 01 2001 - 09:09:13 EDT

  • Next message: Gordon Wishon: "Next IT Committee Meeting"

    >From: "Conrad, Larry" <LConrad@admin.fsu.edu>
    >To: sura-itcom@list.gatech.edu
    >Subject: RE: Re: SURA directory services proposal
    >Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 14:54:34 -0400
    >MIME-Version: 1.0
    >X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
    >Content-Type: text/plain;
    > charset="iso-8859-1"
    >
    >Gordon, et al:
    >OK, I finally got a block of time to wade thru the "Directory Services for
    >Communities of Interest" proposal. This is an interesting proposal and it
    >attempts to get at the issue of how might higher ed make effective use of a
    >"directory of directories" concept. However, I think it is inappropriate
    >for SURA funding.
    >
    >First a general comment: I CAN get enthused about the prospect of trying to
    >solve a specific problem, like how do we make video-conferencing easy to
    >set-up and use. It's just not clear to me, though, that we need a general
    >communities of interest solution to facilitate communication. It still
    >seems to me that is fundamentally a professional association issue. For
    >instance, I routinely use the EDUCAUSE site to identify members of my CoI,
    >so perhaps I'm being short-sighted, but I'm having difficulty understanding
    >"the problem." Plus I do worry about the potential for abuse/misuse. It
    >may be unfair, but at one level, I read the proposal as a really efficient
    >way to generate more SPAM.
    >
    >More to the point, though, is that this strikes me as truly a research
    >project and perhaps not the best use of the SURA funds. There are
    >fundamental (and interesting) questions that need to be addressed before
    >there can be a prototype. Given that is the case, the timeline seems pretty
    >aggressive and the life-cycle funding fuzzy. It seems to me the basic
    >problems should be worked out and then perhaps SURA consider funding a
    >proof-of-concept and/or prototype. Also, the ongoing operational funding
    >model needs to be worked out. For instance, what happens after the first
    >year? Finally, the model for collecting and maintaining the extended data
    >for each CoI is unclear. How automated could this be?. I think this is one
    >of the research problems that needs to be worked on.
    >
    >My $0.02.
    >
    >-Larry Conrad



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 01 2001 - 08:00:24 EDT