NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Tapani Tarvainen <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Tapani Tarvainen <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 30 Aug 2014 09:18:59 +0300
Content-Type:
multipart/signed
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (795 bytes) , signature.asc (186 bytes)
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 07:19:06AM +0300, Avri Doria ([log in to unmask]) wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Bent out of shape because we are not following our processes?
> What an idea?  Almost worthy of a reconsideration request.
> 
> It was sent in NCSG's name.  Yet there was no process to do so.
> 
> I know it is what you and handful of others want, but we have
> Chartered processes by which we make decisions and no decision
> process, as far as I can tell, was followed.

I must support Avri here on general principles, even though
I haven't been exactly active here recently nor do I have
anything to say about this reconsideration request as such.

I would very much like to see ncsg act at least a bit more formally,
in particular to have and follow well-documented processes in its
decision-making.

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen


ATOM RSS1 RSS2