jseng at pobox.org.sg
Wed Jun 25 00:58:17 CEST 2003
As I said, i did not disagree with you.
I just dont think we should have wordings in the problem-statement with
What you describe below can go into the problem-process if there is
agreement, if there is agreement that is the solution to this problem.
Dave Crocker wrote:
> JS> While I do not disagree a lot of what you said, I prefer Keith original
> JS> statement mainly because it does not assume any solution.
> Focusing on disruptive individuals assumes the problem.
> My point is that it is constructive to treat disruptive individuals as a
> symptom, rather than as a core problem.
> They are an especially painful symptom, but their effect is altered
> considerably by working group participant and chair resolve to make
> forward progress.
> Focus on the disruptive individuals and we will debate personal issues.
> We're not very good at that.
> Focus on the positive need to make forward progress, and we will solve
> multiple problems.
> Dave Crocker <mailto:dcrocker at brandenburg.com>
> Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
> Sunnyvale, CA USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>, <fax:+1.866.358.5301>
More information about the Problem-statement