<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] Rules for new lists -- needed or not?
On 23 Apr 2001, at 10:42, Bret Fausett wrote:
> Lists need list managers, chairs, moderators, whatever you want to call
> them, to coordinate the discussion, identify common ground, focus on
> additional areas for discussion, move the discussion past problems that can
> never be solved, answer procedural questions, and in some instances handle
> decorum issues. The Chair should be allowed some discretion in handling all
> of those issues.
My suggestion would be to have the list members select their own list
chair. They should also be allowed to select the list monitor/manager,
IMO. In the past, we have seen WG's whose appointed chairs have
submitted reports that do not resemble a list consensus. That has left
a feeling of "no confidence" in the process. Perhaps if the list members
had the opportunity to select their own chair/co-chairs, the result may
be more universally accepted.
Leah
>
> -- Bret
>
> babybows.com wrote:
> > Questions for those of you that participated in working groups A,B,C,D,E,
> > and Review...
> >
> > Did your working groups have formal rules? If not, were there many
> > instances of decorum problems? Did you manage to get the work done without
> > recourse to an abuse resolution process? We need to determine what rules,
> > if any, should govern these lists. Perhaps past experience can guide us.
>
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|