I also support the idea of having a BB for developing CREWS and reserving
listserves for the time the CREW is ready to go more active.
Just my 2 cents
Fiona
At 06:36 AM 98/06/12 -1000, Jenna Seehafer wrote:
>Joe's concerns about committee and OCREW reports have already been addressed
>to some extent in the proposed articles of the WAOE Constitution. Since
>active groups having 5 or more members will set up their own listserves (or
>MOO rooms or . . .) and send a representative to the coordinating ring, the
>coordinating ring will be able to post a report at some regular interval which
>would include the summaries of activities submitted by the group
>representatives. What we would receive in "waoe-news" is a digest of all WAOE
>activities in all committees and OCREWs for that period.
>
>If we do agree to incorporate, such a report from all active committees and
>OCREWs would be required in the "minutes" of the annual meeting anyway, so we
>would have an official count of active groups at least once per year. But
>the coordinating ring would probably want to post such a report to
>"waoe-news" more often than that to keep everyone unified and informed. I
>think requiring a report each week is excessive (considering my busy
>schedule), but monthly or quarterly summaries seems reasonable. Still, I'm
>reluctant to write into the Constitution an actual time interval for reports
>other than the annual report because the needs and activities of these groups
>are difficult to predict from here. Each group may report at different
>intervals in practice.
>
>The only action we need to take with inactive OCREWS and committees, it seems
>to me, is to move them from the list of active committees on the online
>membership form to a list of proposed groups until enough interest in them is
>developed among new and returning members to send a representative to the
>coordinating ring. When less than four people are interested in a committee
>or OCREW, there would be no active listserve. But a bulletin board topic for
>a developing group would be enough to create an early record of their
>activities for WAOE members who might have an interest in their discussions.
>It seems to me that a natural "midnight clause" is already built into our
>mechanism for activating groups.
>
>Jenna Seehafer
>California State University, Sacramento
>
>
>> Joe Beckmann wrote:
>>
>> Not to be a bureaucrat, but there is a real value in regularity in
>> reports which goes beyond a "report for a report's sake." It builds
>> process. And it need not be more than a Friday afternoon memo on how
>> the servers have been down. There is still enough "noise" on this list
>> - and on the websites and other lists - to make this less critical
>> right now, but I'd like to strongly second Elaina's expression of a
>> need for some kind of progress report at pretty regular intervals.
>> Otherwise, nobody knows that the noise produces. Beyond the argument
>> about a tree in the forest, there's a better argument about keeping
>> everybody up to date and respecting everybody's (a) interest and (b)
>> resources. You do this anyway, so do it regularly and make it count
>> twice.
>
>
-
========================================
Dr. F. S. Crofton
Principal
The ORCAD Group Inc.
101-330 West 2nd Street
North Vancouver, B.C. V7M 1E1
ph/fax: (604) 985-8381
website: www.sustainability.com/orcad
>>>> Make 2000 the Threshold of a Peaceful, Just and Sustainable World <<<
=========================================