Carl Malamud wrote:
The one thing that I agree sticks out is that the language of 3777 talks
about firing *one* person - in the case where the group is dysfunctional,
it may be better to take the group out, as you say.
I think if there is enough momentum to engage in these procedures, it won't
Hi -
Just so we're clear, I think a mass execution procedure is a bad idea.
Serial executions are much better: these people got seated one by one,
and if you don't like them, each one should get their own trial and
sentence.
Changing 3777 to allow group trials seems like a task well beyond the
John,
I think this one warrants a separate thread..
--On 13. januar 2005 10:06 -0500 John C Klensin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think this is acceptable given that we *also* have a recall
procedure. In other words, if the IAOC isn't responsive
to a clear message from a review that you screwed
--On Monday, January 17, 2005 2:34 PM +0100 Harald Tveit
Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
The one thing that I agree sticks out is that the language of
3777 talks about firing *one* person - in the case where the
group is dysfunctional, it may be better to take the group
out, as you say.
The one thing that I agree sticks out is that the language of 3777 talks
about firing *one* person - in the case where the group is dysfunctional,
it may be better to take the group out, as you say.
I think if there is enough momentum to engage in these procedures, it won't
be hard to take
John == John C Klensin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John --On Monday, January 17, 2005 2:34 PM +0100 Harald Tveit
John Alvestrand
John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... The one thing that I agree sticks out is that the language
of 3777 talks about firing *one* person - in the
