On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 7:19 AM, David Meyer <dmm@...> wrote:

On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 6:57 AM, Ed Warnicke (eaw) <eaw@...> wrote:

Dave,
        I've had two things bubbling back to me about board/tsc communication that concern me:

1)  It's been reported to me that our original feedback to the board on the scope did not actually make it
to the board.

I told Inder that we had more extensive edits (as evidenced by, for example, Rob's comments this morning) to the document and I wanted to wait until we had all of the input  incorporated into one package before we gave it to the board. The theory here is that I didn't want to send several drafts with different edits to the board. If you think this should have been handled differently, please raise it on the call.

2)  It's been reported to me that the draft before us was not actually sent to us by the board, but rather unilaterally
        by the chair, not incorporating board feedback.

BTW, in re-reading 2) I'll just note that I consider Inder to speak authoritatively for the Board. If what you are suggesting that he does not or that there is some other internal operational problem with the Board, please make that clear. 

Just to be clear: If you are asserting that there is some kind of internal problem with the Board, please make that clear and I will take it up with the board.  

--dmm

What I know is that the document I have, TSC_policy.doc, was forwarded most recently by Inder (when he asked about our progress) and I forwarded it to tsc@lists. 

I don't actually know if these are actually the case, or just the vagaries of differing reports, but I wanted to raise it
to your attention.

Ed

Again, if you are dissatisfied with the operation of the TSC or if there other operational problems please use the TSC list to discuss these concerns going forward. IMO this is not a crisis and we're just working out the kinks in how we operate; again if you feel differently please raise it during our call.

BTW, citing unamed sources is considered poor form, so please consider this going forward.

--dmm

 

On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 7:39 AM, Ed Warnicke (eaw) <eaw@...> wrote:

I was simply seeking clarification as you sit on both the TSC and board meetings and could thus speak directly :)

Everything is new and moving fast :)

Sure :-) 

Just wanting everything (including communications such as these) to be in the open. In addition, I want to establish that *anyone* can open such a thread on tsc@lists.

--dmm

 

Ed

On Apr 25, 2013, at 9:33 AM, "David Meyer" <dmm@...> wrote:

On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 7:19 AM, David Meyer <dmm@...> wrote:

On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 6:57 AM, Ed Warnicke (eaw) <eaw@...> wrote:

Dave,
        I've had two things bubbling back to me about board/tsc communication that concern me:

1)  It's been reported to me that our original feedback to the board on the scope did not actually make it
to the board.

I told Inder that we had more extensive edits (as evidenced by, for example, Rob's comments this morning) to the document and I wanted to wait until we had all of the input  incorporated into one package before we gave it to the board. The theory here is that I didn't want to send several drafts with different edits to the board. If you think this should have been handled differently, please raise it on the call.

2)  It's been reported to me that the draft before us was not actually sent to us by the board, but rather unilaterally
        by the chair, not incorporating board feedback.

BTW, in re-reading 2) I'll just note that I consider Inder to speak authoritatively for the Board. If what you are suggesting that he does not or that there is some other internal operational problem with the Board, please make that clear. 

Just to be clear: If you are asserting that there is some kind of internal problem with the Board, please make that clear and I will take it up with the board.  

--dmm

What I know is that the document I have, TSC_policy.doc, was forwarded most recently by Inder (when he asked about our progress) and I forwarded it to tsc@lists. 

I don't actually know if these are actually the case, or just the vagaries of differing reports, but I wanted to raise it
to your attention.

Ed

Again, if you are dissatisfied with the operation of the TSC or if there other operational problems please use the TSC list to discuss these concerns going forward. IMO this is not a crisis and we're just working out the kinks in how we operate; again if you feel differently please raise it during our call.

BTW, citing unamed sources is considered poor form, so please consider this going forward.

--dmm