NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
NCSG-Discuss <[log in to unmask]>
X-To:
Sam Lanfranco <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 26 Feb 2015 12:34:25 -0500
Reply-To:
Stephanie Perrin <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID:
Subject:
From:
Stephanie Perrin <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed
MIME-Version:
1.0
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines)
I agree...we have to get the documents in on time.  Milton sent this 
around at least two weeks ago now...in hindsight, we (the policy cttee) 
should have set a deadline and said all comments in by x, it goes out x 
plus two days.
cheers SP
On 2015-02-26 9:50, Sam Lanfranco wrote:
> Milton,
>
> I would suggest that NCSG not only give some members "the pen" to work 
> on documents, but assign "a gavel" to one member who can first warn of 
> deadlines, and then pound the gavel and say "document closed and sent".
> Many of the nuances that are important don't really get carved in 
> stone when documents are tabled and get struggled with in the ongoing 
> processes. It is better to submit a more-or-less consensus document 
> with a few warts to be struggled over later, than to submit no 
> document at all.
>
> Sam L.
>
> On 26/02/2015 9:32 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>> Well, the CWG meeting discussing the surveys was this morning. Early.
>> I wasn't able to attend, so maybe someone else can tell us whether we 
>> missed the boat.
>> Probably so. This is very frustrating.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2