1 |
On Sat, 2008-02-02 at 23:01 +0100, Jan Bilek wrote: |
2 |
> For example these regular meetings you propose - if there is an issue |
3 |
> to talk about why wait until the regular meeting is held? Are there no |
4 |
> efficient and easy to use channels to communicate immediately? If |
5 |
> there is no issue to talk about - regular meeting would be just a |
6 |
> waste of time. |
7 |
|
8 |
Who said that you had to wait until the meeting? I never once even |
9 |
implied that. Instead, I suggested regular meetings so we get *at |
10 |
least* $n meetings a year and get consistent updates. |
11 |
|
12 |
> These institutional things make everything less efficient - and BTW - |
13 |
> they tend to get sooo boring and meaningless... The more non-formal, |
14 |
> immediate and 'not institutionalized' communication - the better. |
15 |
|
16 |
Having served as a Trustee before, I can tell you that having a set |
17 |
meeting time would have likely helped us out, tremendously. Had we a |
18 |
set time to share information with other teams, we would not have likely |
19 |
lost our standing in NM. Without those meetings, we ended up letting |
20 |
things slide longer and longer, as there was no pressure to get anything |
21 |
done. |
22 |
|
23 |
-- |
24 |
Chris Gianelloni |
25 |
Release Engineering Strategic Lead |
26 |
Games Developer |