Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> This list is good at disagreeing, but given the brainpower here, perhaps some
> consensus building might be good? I'll try one approach, and see what happens.
This is a good "creative problem solving" exercise. We tried various other
approaches back in the day:
http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/navyls
If folks (on all sides - we have many more than two here) can relax their guard
a bit, the exercise may pay off, perhaps surprisingly so. Note that the pay
off is most likely to reveal itself in issues around the periphery. This isn't
all-or-nothing.
As facilitator, Stephen will need the patience of Job.
I'll personally refrain from comment for a few rounds. My only suggestion at
this point is that declarative statements should be kept as brief as possible.
Avoid subordinate clauses and conditionals, rather divide complex assertions
into separate simple statements. You might consider a glossary.
Rob
_______________________________________________
LEAPSECS mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
