There are a few issues intermixed in your proposal.
1. Splitting the squeak-dev list - since all such discussions until now
took place there. I don't have a strong opinion, but it's something that
should bee discussed at length, on the squeak-dev list, where the people
affected by it currently all reside.
2. Us Guides would like to be able to do our job. I think we need a
medium on which we can talk, without it being used for myriad other
discussions at the same time, and without threads being pulled to
directions that may be important in the long term, or wider context, but
don't get the next version out the door. We don't want to use private
email, because that creates a disconnect we don't like. We could for
example create yet another squeak list (squeak-guides?), and make that
read only.
3. Since the discussion of your proposal should take in squeak-dev at
least until it is resolved in favor of splitting the list, and we'd like
to retain the SqF list for our purposes at least until the community
actually decides it wants the space, let's keep it here for now. OK?

About 2 - Making the sqf list readonly does not prevent further
discussion if you read something you don't like - all our private email
addresses are a matter of record, and the squeak-dev is right there too.
We do want an open process, just not a completely chaotic one...

(Don't read this message with a stern face, it'll give you wrinkles ;-)

Daniel

Roger Vossler <rvossler at qwest.net> wrote:
> Hi Gang,
> 
> Very nice document. Congratulations to you all. Well done.
> 
> I have three comments as follows:
> 
> 1. The squeakfoundation mailing list should NOT be readonly. Moreover, 
> It should be devoted
>   to all of the non-technical stuff concerning Squeak (political, 
> social, cultural, organizational,
> funding, policy, major and minor decisions, et al) while the squeak-dev 
> list should be reserved
> for technical stuff.
>