<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Dear Johannes,<br>
thanks for your questions, tah I'll answer below from my personal
perspective:<br>
<br>
Am 06.05.2014 21:18, schrieb Johannes Kepper:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1D6BA401-9D12-41C3-B277-340EF9B6DFBE@edirom.de"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Dear all,
thanks to those that did respond to the strategy group's proposals. For those who didn't – it's not too late, please give some feedback and help us to shape the future MEI. You can find the document with the proposals at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IBvbKFM1fo4lwyFnIYnneUhfwTj4DLrAmtCSUfqzeQs/edit?usp=sharing">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IBvbKFM1fo4lwyFnIYnneUhfwTj4DLrAmtCSUfqzeQs/edit?usp=sharing</a>
Since we're approaching the conference, I'd like to ask some questions.
- All proposals don't make a statement about the current MEI Council. Was this an intentional decision? If I remember correctly, there was some concern about this group last year. I know that it won't be easy to find a solution for this one, but I think we should address it in one way or the other…</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
This is a great hint, I guess we just missed to articulate anything
about this. From my part I always was assuming, that any new Board
would replace the "current Council" but others might have another
opinion?! <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1D6BA401-9D12-41C3-B277-340EF9B6DFBE@edirom.de"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">- At first glance, it seems that the first proposal triggered most feedback. Would it be a correct observation that most in the community prefer this over the other two _in principle_, but still would like to clarify some details about it? Please don't get me wrong – I don't want to get rid of the other two proposals, I just want to get a sense of where we are drifting. If you think my impression is wrong (which is perfectly possible), please disagree – either here on MEI-L or in the document linked above. If you like the other proposals (or aspects of them), please speak up – the sooner the better. Please remember that the google document gives the possibility of anonymous feedback, if you prefer. </pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Getting a feeling if general tendencies towards one of the proposals
would be indeed very interesting! Nevertheless the comment frequency
is not to be taken as general tendency towards one or the other...
for example Raffaele shared a quite good argument for Model B over
this list:<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"> In general, I prefer Model B: it's lean and
reflects well the size of the community. It also keeps the focus
on the Guidelines and releases, which I agree with Sigfrid are the
most important product of this community. I feel model B will
allows us to move forward without having to jump through too many
administrative hoops, while tasking people with essential admin
responsibilities. </blockquote>
<br>
Maybe we should try come up with a general pros-and-cons list for
each Model?<br>
<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Benjamin<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1D6BA401-9D12-41C3-B277-340EF9B6DFBE@edirom.de"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Thanks again for your interest and participation.
Best,
Johannes
</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
mei-l mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:mei-l@lists.uni-paderborn.de">mei-l@lists.uni-paderborn.de</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l">https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>