Re: [ga-rules] Procedures and Process

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

Dear All,

One thing is for certain.  This is real progress.  The reason we have not had
real progress in this way in the past is that some do not want us to be able to
show what our consensus is.  Danny's post is being taken out of context in the
sense he obviously agrees that we can develop our Ideas in such a way that they
can be adopted by the majority and documented.

Great job and thank you,
Eric

Dassa wrote:

> |> -----Original Message-----
> |> From: owner-ga-rules@dnso.org On Behalf Of Joanna Lane
> |> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 5:27 AM
> |> To: dassa@dhs.org; [Ga-Rules]
> |> Subject: Re: [ga-rules] Procedures and Process
> |>
> Hello Joanna
>
> Just a quick response for now, I hope to flesh out my comments in detail
> over the next few days.
>
> |> Hello Dassa,
> |> Very good suggestion. Without an agreed procedure, it's very difficult
> to
> |> make any real progress with any proposal that is met with even very
> limited
> |> opposition, unless it already fits with an NC/ BoD agenda, which is not
> |> concerned with introducing a process to micro-manage the GA. Catch 22.
>
> My main purpose would be to work out a process where the GA can get some
> meaningful outcomes for less effort.  This may be a cross between processes
> and best practices.  That is something we may hope to define here.

snipped

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-rules@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-rules" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html