NICE-ESG-Libs Digest Thu, 15 Jun 95 Volume 1 : Issue 267
Today's Topics:
Procedures - reply to Christine
NICE Eiffel Standards Group -- Library Committee Mailing List
To post to list:
NICE-ESG-Libs@atlanta.twr.com
To send mail to the Chairman of the committee:
NICE-ESG-Libs-chair@atlanta.twr.com
Administrative matters (sign up, unsubscribe, mail problems, etc):
NICE-ESG-Libs-request@atlanta.twr.com
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 1995 10:00:02 +0100 (BST)
From: S M Fisher <S.M.Fisher@letterbox.rl.ac.uk>
Subject: Procedures - reply to Christine
To: NICE ESG Library Committee
Hello again,
Christine said:
> ... However the statement by Steve, for example:
>
> "The library committee has a majority of ISE sympathisers, the
> result of which is that discussion is somewhat pointless.."
>
> is destructive, insulting to possibly even more people than he intended,
> and sadly says a lot more about his own attitude than those of his
> targets.
This is of course only my opinion. It is based on the comments that people
make and the way in which they have voted. It is clear that polarisation
of the committee has already occured. It is inevitable when the
vendor/user ratio is so large. I have no commercial axe to grind but have
just a simple desire to have Eiffel in a state where I feel I could
recommend it to my colleages. For this to be possible multiple sources of
compatible compilers and libraries are essential. I will not comment on
Christine's remarks about my attitude, but leave others to judge for
themselves.
> This is an appropriate time to say that it is the responsibility of
> EVERY member to make this committee work. The committee deliberations
> won't fail because the Chair doesn't push business along quickly
> enough, or doesn't hassle people to vote.
This is taking the role of chairmanship too lightly. Pauls proposals for
producing a weekly summary was excellent and I would suggest that
Christine adopts some such scheme. This should be a summary of *ALL*
outstanding issues, references to digests etc. In a face to face meeting
the chair does not simply fire the starting pistol and then 3 months
later call for a vote. The necessity for active chairmanship is even
greater for an electronic meeting.
> The committee WILL fail if
> members line up in opposite trenches and start gunning for each other.
> I am just one member of the committee, and if it makes you feel better
> to blame me if things don't turn out the way you want, then that's OK,
> I promise not to take it personally! But all you are really doing is
> avoiding responsibility.
Christine is wrong to state that she is "just one member of the
committee"; she is the chair and as such is personally responsible to
ensure that the committee functions effectively.
> There are constructive and destructive ways to criticize procedures,
> operation, and proposals.
I am used to criticising other peoples work and suffering honest
criticism and have no intention of becoming a diplomat.
> If you find you strongly disagree with proposal, or even disagree with
> some aspects of it, it is always constructive to attempt to view the
> situation from the other's perspective, to see how far apart your two
> views really are. That is always the basis for constructive criticism.
This is true, but it is also the role of the long suffering chairman to
look for commonality behind the rhetoric.
> Committee Operation
> --------------------
> We are now working towards ELKS vintage '96. There are a number of
> issues outstanding with ELKS '95 which should be addressed as a priority.
> Obviously one of them is the '^' operator, and discussion should continue
> on this topic, but there are others as well. I'd like to establish an agenda
> as quickly as possible. Please submit agenda items, indicating
> their priority as a matter of urgency.
What freedom is left us to change ELKS 95 now? Do we have a deadline? Are
the requested agenda items for ELKS 95 or 96?
Steve
|
|
