I believe the Board's stance is separation and heavily delegation, therefore a linked emailed which both receive, would be such a wide purview it would only ever affect one team and not the other. So I don't believe a contact@ email going to both will be beneficial or of use to anyone.

In T5016#95471, @John wrote:

I believe the Board's stance is separation and heavily delegation, therefore a linked emailed which both receive, would be such a wide purview it would only ever affect one team and not the other. So I don't believe a contact@ email going to both will be beneficial or of use to anyone.

I suppose it applies to more general help requests and things of interest to everyone.

Most companies have a general help email.

Some things like mailerlite currently allow everyone access so they might be useful to have a catch all reply. Something like takedown requests are also useful for the board to see and track (in case of escalation) but sysadmins act upon.

But then it starts to become noise that people don't want to receive. The issue with "general help request" emails is they become general for everything and everything will go there - plus if it's general, it's not specific enough for some who might not want the noise. Escalation is a decision to be made by someone receiving an email, which then puts the responsibility on them to escalate it appropriately and to include all relevant information.

Plus the main advantage of having a Technical Nominated Director is then one person will always share both responsibilities, so the Board will always have an "in" to the email, spreading it out to everyone else to me feel like unnecessary workload for the rest.

As I've said before I'm personally for keeping the 'staff' term at least for now because as John said the board will delegate tasks to us so we are still the 'staff' since we don't only do technical tasks.

Personally I am only for the SRE@ change.

In T5016#95473, @John wrote:

But then it starts to become noise that people don't want to receive. The issue with "general help request" emails is they become general for everything and everything will go there - plus if it's general, it's not specific enough for some who might not want the noise.

I call it customer support provided by as many volunteers as we have.

I can 100% see a use for announcements that need to be sent to everyone and also a contact@ would allow volunteers to start responding to email help requests where they can as we expand and we’d be part ready.

Escalation is a decision to be made by someone receiving an email, which then puts the responsibility on them to escalate it appropriately and to include all relevant information.

Ok

Plus the main advantage of having a Technical Nominated Director is then one person will always share both responsibilities, so the Board will always have an "in" to the email, spreading it out to everyone else to me feel like unnecessary workload for the rest.

True

In T5016#95475, @Reception123 wrote:

As I've said before I'm personally for keeping the 'staff' term at least for now because as John said the board will delegate tasks to us so we are still the 'staff' since we don't only do technical tasks.

We don’t legally have a staff team

Personally I am only for the SRE@ change.

To update on a large IRC debate:

We might drop the catch all

We’re debating a name to replace staff@

Cc’ing @Southparkfan to clarify what the roles are (see IRC and Discord):

What I gather:
We need to softly start removing the staff name
We should replace operations@ with sre@ if SRE doesn’t include Zppix
We should have board@
We should have a mailing list for all sysadmins but never worked out whether SRE = sysadmins or SRE = operations

Per SPF
Ops == SRE
*-admins are their own * team which are part of SRE but *-admins are not SREs themselves

Updated proposal, all removed emails to be redirected for now.

I'd agree with the new proposal. Of course, we should keep staff@ redirected for a long period as it's been here for 4 years.

In T5016#95533, @Reception123 wrote:

I'd agree with the new proposal. Of course, we should keep staff@ redirected for a long period as it's been here for 4 years.

Leaving open for objections but will PR tonight.

In T5016#95534, @RhinosF1 wrote:

In T5016#95533, @Reception123 wrote:

I'd agree with the new proposal. Of course, we should keep staff@ redirected for a long period as it's been here for 4 years.

Leaving open for objections but will PR tonight.

https://github.com/miraheze/puppet/pull/1167

Per @Paladox

@John: merge when ready and i’ll handle updating emails on meta