Re: [openc2] Standing Rules of the OpenC2 Technical Committee

[Trey Darley <trey@newcontext.com>]

On 15.06.2017 14:01:14, duncan@sfractal.com wrote:
> 
> I interpret Bret, Allan, and Trey's comments that they objected to
> the formality of the approving the agenda but not to the concept
> that first thing on agenda is to see if anything should be added to
> agenda - but they can speak for themselves if I am misinterpreting.
> 

Exactly, Duncan, well said.

Policies are like organizational scar tissue, reflecting institutional
responses to past conflicts or issues. As this TC is just getting
going, overloading our development process with formal policies and
procedures strikes me as akin to an autoimmune system attacking the
body; it's certain to adversely impact our agility.

Approaching this question with the perspective of lessons learned from
a couple of years of observing what worked and what didn't in the CTI
TC, I see wisdom in defining a minimal set of P&Ps to give a bit of
structure. Robert's Rules are great, but I don't want to see our
development velocity hampered by folks pedantically going down "point
of order" rabbit trails.

-- 
Cheers,
Trey
++--------------------------------------------------------------------------++
Director of Standards Development, New Context
gpg fingerprint: 3918 9D7E 50F5 088F 823F  018A 831A 270A 6C4F C338
++--------------------------------------------------------------------------++
--
"It is more complicated than you think." --RFC 1925

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature