[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Robert's rules (Re: [ga] Blockage/delay of postings)

To: "'Joe Baptista'" <baptista@pccf.net>
Subject: RE: Robert's rules (Re: [ga] Blockage/delay of postings)
From: "Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 02:53:30 -0800
Cc: "'Karl Auerbach'" <karl@CaveBear.com>, "'Harald Tveit Alvestrand'" <Harald@Alvestrand.no>, "'William X. Walsh'" <william@dso.net>, <ga@dnso.org>, "'Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law'" <froomkin@law.miami.edu>
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.20.0001060626480.2811-100000@proxy.pccf.net>
Reply-To: <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
Sender: owner-ga@dnso.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> From: Joe Baptista [mailto:baptista@pccf.net]
> Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2000 3:28 AM
> 
> On Thu, 6 Jan 2000, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> 
> > I disagree, at least for the WGs. We haven't had quite the 
> disruption
> >that the GA has suffered. The old saw about not fixing what 
> isn't broken,
> 
> I can change that.

Why? Just to instantiate a maturity level? Do you commonly go around
breaking things just because you can?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBOHR0KrSQZucFLn2bEQJ+EQCg/UV9s99IEjwsUWqFWLPmxLvCOdUAn2jY
re2tS40d9n1hTTC/zJDyF33l
=9H0m
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Follow-Ups:
- RE: Robert's rules (Re: [ga] Blockage/delay of postings)
  - From: Joe Baptista <baptista@pccf.net>

References:
- RE: Robert's rules (Re: [ga] Blockage/delay of postings)
  - From: Joe Baptista <baptista@pccf.net>

Prev by Date: Re: [ga] Blockage/delay of postings
Next by Date: Re: Robert's rules (Re: [ga] Blockage/delay of postings)
Prev by thread: RE: Robert's rules (Re: [ga] Blockage/delay of postings)
Next by thread: RE: Robert's rules (Re: [ga] Blockage/delay of postings)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread