Re: Final Call: accept incorporated comments

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Robert and all,

  Robert, perhaps you should take this discussion off list.  To continue
down the path the you seem to be taking here is likely not to
be favorable to your continuing to maintain your freedom in the
light of 9/11.

  A word to the wise should be sufficient...  ???

Robert Elz wrote:

>     Date:        Thu, 14 Mar 2002 08:38:54 -0800
>     From:        "todd glassey" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>
>     Message-ID:  <039001c1cb76$bcd41680$020aff0c@tsg1>
>
>   | They have to. The problem is that the term Archived is undefined. The
>   | constraints regarding who has access and how the information is to be kept.
>
> That's part of the problem, but not all of it.   I want the ability to
> make comments that aren't to be archived (anywhere, for anyone).
>
> Now it maybe (in fact, probably should be) that off the record comments
> that X is a manipulative bastard, and should never be appointed to
> anything (which I don't want archived, as X may be a potential employer
> one day...) made by me should carry almost no weight at all.   On the
> other hand, if the nomcom gets lots of similar comments, that just might
> give them a clue that it really would be better not to appoint X.
>
>   | This is not the FISA tribunal. Its the NomCom.
>
> Sorry, the FISA acronym is unknown to me, so I have no idea the
> significance of that comment.
>
>   | No - I disagree. All records of any types of communcations with anyone in an
>   | official role MUST become part of the record.
>
> Hmm... so you're saying that everyone in any official role must carry around
> a tape recorder (with or without "tape") and record all conversations made
> to them, and (at least if anything related to the role is conveyed) make that
> recording a part of the official record?
>
> A recording is the only way to get an accurate impression (well, as accurate
> as it can be) of what happened with spoken communications - transcripts
> necessarily omit much of the intonation, etc.
>
> It is a little hard for me to believe that anyone would really conceive
> of that as necessary for any kind of organisation - let alone the comparatively
> benign one that we're concerned with here.
>
>   | Not as far as accountability goes.
>
> Accountability for what?   The nomcom is asked to use their judgement to
> appoint the best people it can find.   All kinds of things (including
> past observations from before the nomcom member even considered being
> part of the nomcom) influence that decision.   What possible good can it be
> to record a subset of those influences?  Because even if we were to insist on
> keeping tape recordings (with the recorder running all the time - you never
> can tell when a chance remark may be made - even when you're sleeping, your
> unconscious mind may pick up on some comment that happens to be made within
> your hearing) we'd still never be able to do better than a subset.
>
> kre

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208