[Cz-L] Re: Celebration: I believe we should not write individually

I certainly agree with your reasoning, Jerome; and I
might have taken over - if elected - this specific
task: after all, I used to be considered as a good
negotiator by my colleagues.
But the problem is that, starting in a few days, I
will <be on the road> for about a year, as explained
in one of my previous mails. Of course, I'll try to
connect and check my mails whenever possible but, most
probably, I'll not be available permanently, as
required for such a mission.
Sorry, I cannot but decline.
Regards,
Charles

--- jerome schatten <romers_at_shaw.ca> wrote:

> Hi Charles, Marianne, et al.
>
> The problem, as I see it is that there really is no
> Czernowitz-L
> 'group'. There is a mailing list which very loosely
> couples us together,
> but there really is no structure other than the
> rules of the list
> (civility and focus) as enforced by the moderator.
>
> The 'actioning' of project ideas seems to require
> (as Mimi has
> demonstrated) the emergence of a sub-group with an
> ad-hoc leader who
> will organize the efforts of like minded
> participants and keep efforts
> focused on the goal of the moment.
>
> As well, the relationship between the sub-group(s)
> and Cz-L needs to be
> articulated and clear -- how else to form a
> consensus so as to speak as
> a group?
>
> It may be worth thinking about a structure that
> enables us to do things
> with a single voice as we wouldn't have to re-invent
> the wheel each time
> we decided to do something as a group (cemetery,
> reunion, anniversary,
> etc.).
>
> Other than trying to formalize things, I can't see
> how we can act as
> anything other than loosely coupled individuals.
>
> I personally feel uncomfortable transmitting on
> behalf of Cz-L anything
> other than simple pleasantries, when there is no way
> of determining what
> the group position is.
>
> Over to you Charles, Marianne, anyone?
>
> jerome
>
-snip-
Received on 2006-07-22 21:02:55