Nandalal Gunaratne a écrit :
>
> This seems a reasonable argument. But which is easier to organise and direct;
> is easier to move in one direction and easier to get agreement on issues? If
> we continue to argue about each and every issue, like where it should be
> incorporated first, and each local branch want to do things in a different
> way, will it help or hinder? On the other hand the local branch may take the
> action that is most suitable for that particular country.
>
> But the first thing to do is to incorporate it -anywhere! Then let the local
> branches spread based on a mutualy accepted draft.
>
> Nandalal
>
>
>
Hi Nandalal,
I plainly agree with you.
I don't say that local branches will want to do anything in a different
way. I just say that local branches may be the flesh on the bones and
that I think the rules of "syndication" of local branches might be more
clearly stated in the document.
However, if you think we have to move fast, we can postpone this
point... but I don't think that it is a wise decision because the
starting action capacity will come from local branches.
Philippe
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/openhealth/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
