On Nov 6, 2007 9:31 AM, Peter Gaston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "ian sison (mailing list)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > There should be a close-knit group that will step forward and state > > their platform. The people comprising this group should have to be > > able to meet often, be able to rely on each other, should be familiar > > with each others working styles. > > Having such group has both advantages and disadvantages. The close-knit > group can work well together, but at the same time there should be a > guarantee that they will not form a clique within the organization. > What we call "cronies" in politics.
At this point, what matters is results. If this group is elected on the basis of a set of goals and objectives, and commits to achieving them in the time frame of one year, it doesn't really matter who or what comprises that group. It could be one person, or a 'clique' for all i care. If the goals are accepted by the majority of members, and they are actually achieved in the fiscal year, then it's all good. This eliminates politics, and forces all to focus on getting work done. Now if the goals aren't met, then the organization can always boot them out - but only on the basis of non-performance. Ian _________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
