RE: [council] NCtelecon 21 September 2000, minutes

[Dany Vandromme <vandrome@renater.fr>]

On Sat, 30 Sep 2000, erica.roberts wrote:

> I sympathise with the points made by Ken and suggest we review the form in 
> which we require minutes to be kept at our next meeting.
> To avoid the problems Ken has identified, I suggest our minutes be confined to 
> a record of the decisions we make and do not atttempt to rehash who siad what 
> in the course of discussion leading up to NC decisions.
> 
> r,
> erica
-
I suggest a more rigorous minutes taking method;

1) follow the chronological order of the agenda (It is the responsability
of the chair to keep the discussion on the track)

2) keep the detailed reporting of the decision, including the remarks of
ken about authoring

3) clearly state at the end of each discussion item the relevant decision
made or action to be done

4) summarize at the end all decisions and actions. Then it will be much
easier for the next meeting to review where we are in terms of actions, to
agree on group decisions and to approve the minutes themselves.

Regards
Dany
-
> 
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dany VANDROMME                    |  Directeur du GIP RENATER

                Reseau National de Telecommunications 
         pour la Technologie, l'Enseignement et la Recherche

                                  |  ENSAM
Tel   :  +33 (0)1 53 94 20 30     |  151 Boulevard de l'Hopital
Fax   :  +33 (0)1 53 94 20 31     |  75013 Paris
E-mail: Dany.Vandromme@renater.fr |  FRANCE
--------------------------------------------------------------------