Re: Core Meeting

[Nadim Shaikli <shaikli at yahoo dot com>]

--- Mohammed Elzubeir <elzubeir at arabeyes dot org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-12-28 at 08:57 -0800, Nadim Shaikli wrote:
> > If we have quorum (per the handbook and in this instance means 2 out of
> > the 3) then the meeting is on.  I'm checking my astronomy catalog (and
> > might query Youcef) to see if the planets will line-up any time soon for
> > all three of us to be on at the same time :-)
> 
> Yes, I am aware of what the handbook says. However, I am of the opinion
> that we are only 3 and thus the rule should change. I think it should
> say, minimum of 3. There! That's an official proposal ;)

We must be on different tracks today :-)  We really need to maintain
progress in any way possible.  People will have problems occasionally
(note our track record of the last month+) and requiring everyone to
be there else the meeting is not to be held simply puts pressures on
those that are having issues or problems and are unable to show-up
(its an unnecessary added pressure).  I think being lenient in this
regard is better than being harsh - if the parties are not there and
there is a legit excuse (its not a chronic issue) and progress can be
made without them, then let progress reign :-)

Just some thoughts.

 - Nadim



		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
All your favorites on one personal page – Try My Yahoo!
http://my.yahoo.com