[governance] Programme outline and schedule released

[Jeremy Malcolm]

William Drake wrote:
> Anyway, this would seem to have two practical consequences.  First, given
> the way that the program is specified in the 6th section on Content, I don't
> see how any of the themes we've discussed proposing could be accommodated in
> the main sessions.  All four themes are probably too orthogonal no matter
> how we wordsmith their descriptions.  So the choices would seem to be a)
> abandon the effort, b) adapt the proposal to reality, or c) frame it in a
> sort of "we would have liked to have had plenary discussions on the
> following but see this won't be happening' sort of manner, which I imagine
> some would say is too negative etc.

Not at all, in my view.  There is no reason why we should regard the 
draft programme as particularly authoritative.  From what Adam has said, 
I doubt the acting Advisory Group spent much time on it.  It is more 
likely something that Marcus and Nitin drew up.  If we disagree with it, 
let's say so.  Indeed, the draft programme outline itself makes it clear 
that it "is conceived a rolling document", to be amended in light of 
comments submitted by 17 May and made at the consultations the following 
week.  So I don't see why we need to adapt our proposal to reality. 
Rather, let's endeavour to adapt reality to our proposal.

-- 
Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com
Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor
host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}'
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance