Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity. On Feb 4, 2012 5:50 AM, "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > > On 2/3/2012 8:41 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > > Lets not forget that the model referred to *included* the IPMC. The > > IPMC once had a useful function, it was a safety net for fledgling > > communities. > > The IPMC never served that purpose. Projects were scuttled even in > its first year.
Where strong and clear mentorship existed the IPMC has worked just fine. Where absent the IPMC has failed. This is the core of my concerns. Once the proposal explicitly addresses or prevents the circumstances in which strong mentorship is lacking I'll be happy. I wish people would stop arguing with me as if I am saying the IPMC should stay, can people please address my expressed concern, rather than someone welded concerns. Ross
