|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 12 new of 32 responses total. |
jp2
|
|
response 21 of 32:
| 
Oct 27 14:14 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
jp2
|
|
response 22 of 32:
|
Oct 27 20:23 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 23 of 32:
|
Oct 27 20:33 UTC 2001 |
Consensus does not mean unanimity. This board has moved forward without
consensus in the past. Irrational concerns do not gaurantee paralysis
under consensus any more than a 5-4 split under Roberts Rules gaurantees
unanimity.
Whatever system the board is using needs to be one under which everyone is
comfortable and the board can make non-unanimous decisions and move on.
Majority oriented procedures do not do this any better or worse than
consensus oriented procedures.
|
jp2
|
|
response 24 of 32:
|
Oct 27 20:49 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
krj
|
|
response 25 of 32:
|
Oct 27 21:40 UTC 2001 |
What we need on the Grex board is a junior-league Machiavelli who will
threaten to get people who oppose him forced off the board.
|
aruba
|
|
response 26 of 32:
|
Oct 28 03:16 UTC 2001 |
Re #24: Sure, a vote can be forced before everyone agrees. I recall scg
doing that himself, as a matter of fact.
|
jp2
|
|
response 27 of 32:
|
Oct 28 03:17 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
aruba
|
|
response 28 of 32:
|
Oct 28 03:45 UTC 2001 |
He said "Let's vote", and we did.
|
jp2
|
|
response 29 of 32:
|
Oct 28 03:50 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
other
|
|
response 30 of 32:
|
Oct 28 18:42 UTC 2001 |
We do not *require* consensus. We *strive* for it. Any suggestion that
the drive or need for consensus has paralyzed us in any way seems
specious to me.
We choose to move at a slow and considered pace, but that is a helluva
long way from paralysis.
|
srw
|
|
response 31 of 32:
|
Dec 3 02:14 UTC 2001 |
In answer to (way back there is resp:19) Sindi's questioning whether
staff work is done because it's a challenge, I'd have to say no. Jan
pretty much hit it on the head (resp:17) when he described my answering
of staff email as an annoyance that I put up with because no one else
wants to do it. I can only assume it is the same for other staffers.
In fact it can be a challenge, but mostly it is drudgery that I try to
do as competently and quickly as I can because there are other things
that I'd much rather be doing. I batch up answering staff mail until the
weekend and answer it all at once, because that way is more efficient
for me. I definitely don't do it for the challenge. There's not enough
cahllenge to make it worth the effort, but I do enjoy the odd challenge
that pops up unexpectedly (Like questions for staff in Estonian - I
guess this guy thought we could read that. It's at times like that when
I like to surprise them. We almost did.)
No, I'd much rather be writing code. I just think Grex needs me more to
be doing this. I guess I have Jan's "weird mental defect".
|
mdw
|
|
response 32 of 32:
|
Dec 3 03:10 UTC 2001 |
I'm not nearly as good as Steve is at answering mail, but I try to
answer a certain percentage of mail that is weird off-the-wall type
stuff. Sometimes that's stuff that I suspect Steve would answer with "I
don't know the answer, but...", occasionally it's stuff I think nobody
else on staff wants to even think about answering, like people who
complain about e-mail when it's really some sort of family dispute, or
the guy who I think wanted us to set up some sort of crypto free-haven.
|