[CIMC-work] a half-week's worth of positions...

[Garth Liebhaber]

Chris K., all,

a. Chris, I didn't realize you had a request for issues to be 
in separate emails.  to voice personally, i found your 
below post to be incredibly useful and very concise.

b. to jump into another response, with liason role, is that 
this is what i've been *asking* for.  put inversely, I've been 
frustrated to read forwards that don't introduce a relevant 
context of what's been going on in the discussion, why it 
matters, the direction it's going in, etc. type stuff.  When I 
said we should discuss things to find something workable.  
I acknowledge that I'm the only person complaining, I also 
wanted to make that gesture in order to defer to other's 
thoughts/feelings.  not to create a mob effect, but to be 
constructive, perhaps there's changes i can make in my 
own process...

as to apologies, that quickly touches upon the 
philosophical concept of rightous indignation.  perhaps 
others are effective with it, but from what i've seen lately, 
it's been an escalation of conflict.  not good.  i feel a 
failing with that lately in my cooption of it.  so, lately i 
give an email a few minutes before i respond to it.   so, let 
me apologise 100% and pledge to try working in a more 
peaceable manner.

c.  i will also make it a point to sign my emails to other 
lists that i am "speaking as an individual who is in 
communication with his collective". I don't expect to be 
communicating too much with us-process.  i'm a little 
tired.

ciao,
garth

                        
                        Okay, everyone, I know I asked for topics 
to be in separate emails, but here
 I go violating my own request. I'm catching up. Hope it's 
not too
 bothersome....
 
 
 - Individual editorial passwords are okay by me.
 
 - I'll make sure to always sign off as "Chris K." and to 
note that I am only
 representing myself if I post non-CIMC-consensed emails 
to global lists.
 
 - I've been in favor of formalization, within the 
boundaries of
 CIMC-participant-based trust, since the beginning. I 
support Chris G.'s
 "admin guide" suggestion, and Garth's call for minimal 
meeting attendance,
 and Emily's call for a CIMC institutional history and 
introductory folder.
 
 - I do not support the idea of having a moderated queue 
-- that is, where at
 least one CIMC editor would have to look at and approve 
a submitted post
 before it is listed on the newswire. It is preferable to have 
enough
 volunteers to be able to have 24/7 monitoring of the 
newswire so that posts
 may be quickly hidden if they violate our editorial policy.
 
 - I support Chris G.'s idea of having volunteers as 
"auxiliary admins," if
 they wish to do so.
 
 - Garth, I accept your apology regarding my role as 
liaison, but I can't
 help but wonder if it isn't 100%. You follow it up by 
saying we can "talk
 about [my] role and how we can make it work." This 
implies that you have
 some problems with the way I do my liaison work for this 
CIMC list. If you
 have something to say, say it. Allow me to address your 
specific concerns.
 
 - Rita, your copy to volunteers looks very good -- it's 
clean, informative,
 and succinct.
 
 - I will be addressing Tom W.'s suggested group-editorial 
model and others'
 comments on it, soon.
 
 - And, I will be addressing other CIMCers' expressed 
issues, soon.
 
 
 Chris K.
 
 ___________

Stop baby sea turtles from being crushed!
http://www.care2.com/go/z/11745/1008