On Sun, Feb 07, 1999 at 10:37:39PM -0500, Bret A. Fausett wrote:
> Einar Stefferud wrote:
>
> >Here I am in strong agreement that the whole concept of Fair Hearing
> >Panels has been subvertted by inavertant editing whcih converts them
> >into a mecahisim to be used to stop progress on any Research Committee
> >proposal that someone does not like.
>
> I don't think that's a fair reading of the sections. A Fair Hearing
> allows an aggrieved party the opportunity to explain a problem, propose a
> better solution, and discuss the issues with the Research Committee.
> Nothing requires the Research Committee to accept the proposal or slow
> down the process.
Running the hearing slows down the process, intrinsically. A hearing
takes time that would have been spent doing other things. As long as
I am guaranteed a "fair hearing" at will, I can slow down the
process.
Put it this way -- what prevents the fair hearing from becoming a
fillibuster?
--
Kent Crispin, PAB Chair "Do good, and you'll be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lonesome." -- Mark Twain
