[eDebate] Topic Area Discussion
lesicko at macalester.edu
Mon Apr 10 20:54:23 CDT 2006
Actually, the real criticism is that the topic selection process for the NDT got screwed up by merger. NDT did very little right, but it did produce better topics. We got to vote on resolutions and not areas. And the Committee gave lots of thought to the wording of the resolutions. We would see the propositions at Heart in February and could comments on the proposed wordings while into July.
Those of us who are ancient and drying up remember the good old days of resolutions that took months to craft. Even the worst NDT resolution was better than what the merger's process spews out.
It takes about a year to create a good proposition and using the CEDA calendar's demands makes a good resolution unlikey.
I would like a smaller committee and a timeline that lets a few people work on wording. We have outstanding NDT people trying to adjust themselves to a value proposition time-line. We would be better off if the topic chair could use the NDT rules and create 5 resolutions instead of X number of areas.
Committees are a necessary check on bureaucratic power, but a roomful of people is not recipie for a good topic. A smaller group will produce a better proposition,
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: "Josh Hoe" <jbhdb8 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [eDebate] Topic Area Discussion
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 20:26:00 -0400
More information about the Mailman