Re: Summary of comments

On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 03:02:52PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >>>>> In article <20030217202447(dot)GA29163(at)wile(dot)excelhustler(dot)com>, John Goerzen <jgoerzen(at)complete(dot)org> writes:
>
> > It sounds like you're suggesting that once we have our list of
> > problems, we can just look at each one and either reject it as not
> > applicable wrt bylaws amendments, or implement an amendment for it?
>
> I was thinking that prioritizing the issues at hand would
> also be useful, so we work on the most important issues first, and
> the lower priority items come along as we come to a close.

OK, how about this for the immediate future then:

1. Taral issues a combined document for our inspection

2. We do some brief priortization into some general categories (high,
medium, low). I imagine that finding consensus on this will be
easy.

3. Taral issues a new document ordered by priorities

4. Using the Subject line as an identifier, we can discuss several items
concurrently in e-mail, starting with high-priority items. For each
item, we will decide if the best solution involves a bylaws change, and
if so, propose one. If not, we will communicate changes to other bodies
within SPI if appropriate (Board, membership committee, etc)

If this sounds like a good template, I'll rewrite our agenda tonight.

-- John