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

Re: Re: [ga] PAB rules v. RROR

To: Roberto Gaetano <roberto.gaetano@voila.fr>
Subject: Re: Re: [ga] PAB rules v. RROR
From: "!Dr. Joe Baptista" <baptista@pccf.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 07:53:27 -0500 (EST)
cc: kent@songbird.com, ga@dnso.org
In-Reply-To: <200001110711.IAA11133@smtp-out.minitel.net>
Sender: owner-ga@dnso.org



On Tue, 11 Jan 2000, Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> Anyway, the PAB rules are a very good starting point, IMHO.

This is the problem - and a root problem at best.  Under roberts rules -
there are no IMHO's.  In fact as chair - you have no opinion, and that is
a professional position.  Your sole duty is to break deadlocks and
officiate over proceedure, not provide us with your flowery opinions.

Regards
joe

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Re: [ga] PAB rules v. RROR
  - From: "Ken Stubbs" <kstubbs@dninet.net>

References:
- Re: Re: [ga] PAB rules v. RROR
  - From: "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto.gaetano@voila.fr>

Prev by Date: Re: [ga] PAB Rules v. RROR
Next by Date: Re: [ga] PAB rules v. RROR
Prev by thread: Re: Re: [ga] PAB rules v. RROR
Next by thread: Re: Re: [ga] PAB rules v. RROR
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread