Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 09:46:30 -0800
From: Ray Dillinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
...
We're trying to decide:
How shall we choose the steering committee?
When we implement that process, we shall decide:
Who shall be on the steering committee and why?
The steering committee will later decide:
What are our *criteria* for usefulness in reports
and language features?
At some point the steering committee will then decide:
What procedure shall the editors use?
Who shall be the editors?
And the editors decide:
What language features are useful?
I'm mixing up stages of the process when I talk already about answers
to the last question. Forgive me, I guess I'm finding it hard to think
through so many layers of meta.
Bear
Nicely summarized -- thank you! Everybody should focus on the fact that
we're still in the first step of the process described above.
So according to the current schedule (assuming we stick to it), we start
registering voters and taking nominations next Saturday. So that means we
need to decide soon whether the SC really will be doing registrations in
advance of the vote, or if we're doing some kind of combined registration
and vote.
Now I confess I'm still in the dark about how exactly such a combined vote
could work in a way that appears to be fair. So let me ask this: is there
any way in which separate registration and voting seem -unfair-? Maybe it
seems inconvenient, cumbersome, needlessly complicated, slow, etc. But
assuming we modify the registration process to make -everybody- register
(even if there were registered for the R6RS vote), would there be anything
that seems unfair about it?
- Alan
_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
