Until about a month or two ago, that's more like how we did it. I made up an agenda beforehand and we followed it. Then I tried running a meeting without writing an agenda for fun, and it (and all subsequent meetings) have actually been a lot nicer. People are actually bringing up interesting stuff to talk about, and not limiting themselves to whatever's in the agenda.
I suppose other takes on it would be helpful, though, see if others feel the same way about me. Maybe it's just looking better to me because I get to be lazier? :) Ron (PS: to start a new post, please email discuss@ directly, don't reply to an old post and change the subject, cuz in threaded email clients it gets glommed together :) ) On 2012-10-02 18:54, Lynn wrote: > So it seems that meetings could use some more structure to allow for better > efficiency. > > Below are just suggestions: > > If we could have ALL issues to be discussed put on an agenda before the > meeting with an allotted amount of time and limit them to those times it > would improve things a lot. By doing this we can keep the discussion to the > emails and the meeting to what we actually need many people here for. > > And for items that may come up at the last minute a simple round table at the > end of the meeting. > > Also, a bit more respectfulness of speakers would be beneficial. Nobody likes > being interrupted. > > Hopefully some changes like this would allow the meetings to stay more on > topic rather than decay into circular discussions that don't resolve > anything. > _______________________________________________ > SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List > Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss > Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/ _______________________________________________ SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/
