>That's the same logic used by everyone who participates in closed
processes.
>Did you ask whether the meeting was open to everyone who is interested? Did
>you refuse to participate in a closed meeting? Is it alright when ti's the
>ORSC that does it, but a terrible crime when it's someone else?
It does, indeed, appear to be closed. No, to my knowledge, ORSC has not
refused to attend - indeed, I see ORSC as "crashing the party" as it
were. I, personally, would rather have someone there who will report
back what was said and what was done, rather than have to guess.
Look, if some people want to have a closed meeting, I can't stop
them. But I can point it out (as you're doing, too), and I can help
someone attend whom I trust will report back.
What more do you want? Really - what more can be done? I'm open
to suggestion!
Christopher
__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________
