On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 6:43 AM, Lodewijk <[email protected]> wrote: > thanks for the explanation, I think the whole banning was quite justified. > But besides that, as I also asked in an earlier email, I can understand > geniice's feeling that it is unclear what the topics are (which can be > solved by an agenda as he suggests or a description of what tend to be the > topics nowadays as I asked). Could you perhaps make it more insightful?
Realized I never responded to this; sorry about the late response. As I said before, office hours are meant to be open-ended gatherings, explicit time where people should feel comfortable asking questions and meeting people in a more informal setting. I usually have a few things in mind that I bring up during office hours, but I don't impose those topics. I've often been surprised at the direction of the conversations, and I've almost always walked away feeling better informed. Moreover, I've found it a great way to bolster relationships, and I've noticed a lot of constructive activity happens on strategy wiki after these office hours. Sometimes, IRC meetings are called with more explicit intentions; in those cases, agendas are usually posted beforehand. =Eugene -- ====================================================================== Eugene Eric Kim ................................ http://xri.net/=eekim Blue Oxen Associates ........................ http://www.blueoxen.com/ ====================================================================== _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
