On Wednesday, November 6, 2002, at 03:34 PM, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I would also add the observation that there really only need be one discussion, going through the issues in series... The higher-numbered issues depend pretty extensively on details of the lower-numbered ones; plus, I think having the same dedicated voices, ongoing (rather than different voices working in parallel) would achieve better results and still be sufficiently fastAt 11:15 PM +0000 11/6/02, Simon Cozens wrote:And, though, snipped, a fine solution it is, with two caveats:Here is my suggested solution to the problem.
1) There *must* be someone who will drive the discussion, or it will wander off into some bizarre corner and die
2) Under no circumstances can Larry be allowed to subscribe, or even read, the lists. :)
Plus, one group would not be nearly as distracting to the ongoing design efforts as it would be to have N groups all pinging with questions simultaneously, which is what we already have. :-/
MikeL
