Re: [council] Fw: [wg-review] Concerns
Hello Greg and WG-Review members,
I hope you can clear up these concerns which have been expressed
by some members of NC members.
As you planned, the managed discussion is expected to take off soon.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chicoine, Caroline G." <CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com>
To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>; "names council" <email@example.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 11:07 PM
Subject: RE: [council] Fw: [wg-review] Concerns
> Ken I agree. I have heard that again given the sheer number of emails,
> meaningful participation in this WG has been difficult. Philip, if it is
> not already on our business plan, I think we need to add a project to
> the work that WGD has accomplished so we have a set of procedures in place
> soon before we create any new working groups.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Digitel - Ken Stubbs" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "names council" <email@example.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 9:31 PM
Subject: [council] Fw: [wg-review] Concerns
> fellow council members
> this independent analysis by one of the wg-review participants represents
> an excellent example of the reason why, in the future, some sort of
> structure and methodology needs to be developed for managing working
> without a definitive, understandable, methodology, it is very difficult
> ascertain that the finished product really represents legitimate,
> broad-based, consensus opinions.
> ken stubbs
> p.s. i don't know who this gentlemen is but his comments are very
> and constructive
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dr. Michael S. Gendron" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: <email@example.com>
> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 7:39 AM
> Subject: [wg-review] Concerns
> > To all:
> > This has been an interesting experience......wg-review. I can understand
> > many have dropped out.
> > I believe in that if you want to have something down, that you ask the
> > busiest person you know. They know how to budget their time and thus
> > things done. This group surely takes that and more.
> > BUT, this work group is almost impossible. I have several concerns:
> > 1) Many emails are very personal in nature - flaming each other and not
> > sticking to the issues. This increases the about of reading immensely.
> > 2) The discussions can only be likened to 30 people in a conference room
> > where there are 10 different topics being discussed simultaneously, with
> > people on the opposite ends of the room.
> > 3) The lack of structure, policy, and direction makes this process
> > untenable.
> > 4) The few people that are left in this group cannot be called
> > representative of the Internet. This consensus (sorry) is not useful.
> > Think about it, we publish a report...make a statement. The someone
> > not like it - they have the option of negating everything we say because
> > this groups is a small contingent that could no way represent the
> > as a whole.
> > I think our work is vital, but we need to model ourselves on standard
> > business processes. Some ideas - set agenda's, have focus
> > discussions, set interim goals so we know when we have accomplished
> > something - not goalss like "get the report done," develop
> > that discuss particular topics then bring the issues back to the full
> > for a discussion, employ better collaborative technologies. We have to
> > something.
> > I am willing to help, get involved, get more people involved, but we
> > organize this WG.
> > Dr. Gendron
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
> > Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html