[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GSBN:New member discussion policy
- To: GSBN GSBN@...
- Subject: Re: GSBN:New member discussion policy
- From: Jeff Ruppert jeff@...
- Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 17:01:34 -0700
- Reply-to: "GSBN" GSBN@...
- Sender: "GSBN" GSBN@...
Hear ye! Hear ye!
I agree with Paul and have not participated up to this point because I
personally do not know anyone involved. I would, however, like to
comment on the function of this list.
I LIKE having access to everyone here in this "chosen" way! Whatever we
decide, I would like it to not jeapordize the feeling of close peers
commenting and exchanging views. There are only a few venues I feel
that we are able to do this within. I don't think releasing the
archives jeapordizes this only if the feedback doesn't overwhelm us, in
terms of volume and/or tone.
Y'all have a great new year!
Jeff Ruppert, P.E.
Ecological Building, Engineering and Consulting
Front Range Office West Slope Office
5444 Marshall Road 1022 Main St.
Boulder, CO 81623 Carbondale, CO 81623
303.443.4355 f 1.866.795.6699 f
Paul Lacinski wrote:
First off, thanks to Chug for your graceful retraction, and to Chris
for your honest assessment of the Hank situation.
Now we are only left with the question of what to do about the
archives. My opinion is that the Hank thread has no value except as
gossip, which is to say that it has a negative value. For the sake
of avoiding any possible pain to Hank, I would move that we ask Bill
to strike it. There's enough pain in this world without any
unintended contributions from us.
But now I will speak as the official Liberal From Massachusetts, who
wants to put a big government beurocracy over this list. As this
discussion has gone along it has come clear to me that we never had
any business posting discussion of new members to our archives.
When would you ever do this? Can you imagine a company or agency
that, after hiring a new employee, posted a list on the web of all
the people they did and didn't hire, and transcripts of the internal
meetings? Can you imagine having a party and posting a list on the
web of who was invited, and also who was not invited, and why?
We could just decide to strike all discussion of candidates who are
ultimately rejected. (And who knows, maybe there won't be any more.)
But to me it makes life alot easier (for everyone except Bill) if we
agree to strike all threads regarding new members. Our internal
business is never of practical use to the wider world, regardless of
the outcome. There is no value to openness, here. So unless Bill
thinks it would be an imposition, I would move that from now on we
remove all of these new member discussions.
All the best,
Paul M. Lacinski
Mail: PO Box 107
Packages: 463 Main Street
Ashfield, MA 01330 USA
(001) 413 628 3800
View excerpts from Serious Straw Bale at:
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.chelseagreen.com/2004/items/seriousstrawbale">http://www.chelseagreen.com/2004/items/seriousstrawbale</a>
--- This list does not allow attachments or HTML mail. ---
---The notes below outline what was removed. ---
text/plain (text body -- kept)
GSBN is an invitation-only forum of key individuals and representatives
of regional straw construction organizations. The costs of operating
this list are underwritten by The Last Straw Journal in exchange for use
of the GSBN as an advisory board and technical editing arm.
For instructions on joining, leaving, or otherwise using the GSBN list,
send email to GSBN@...HELP in the SUBJECT