Comment on policy proposal

Jump to: navigation, search

Great work! I am however not clear on the facilitators. I can understand their role and responsibilities, but I am not sure about who they are, how they are selected, etc.

I also have a minor point about the last paragraph. It states "facilitator may choose to table the suggestion". The problem is the word table which has a different meaning in American and British usage. (Wayne would probably know better than me on this). I think "set aside" might be better.

JohnWS 06:17, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

JohnWS (talk)18:17, 3 August 2009

Could you elaborate a bit on the facilitators detail? Since facilitators are a function of the workgroup, and the charter and policy draft would supplement each other, I'm wondering why you think it's necessary to include it in this document? Where/How would you include it? My preference would be to leave it out, or maybe to reference the charter, but I'd like to hear your thoughts.

Thanks so much for pointing "table" out to me! I don't know what I was thinking, I must have been very tired. That word is actually the opposite of what I was meaning to say. I replaced it with "dismiss". What do you think?

Jesse Groppi (talk)03:47, 4 August 2009

P.S. I did add a definition for "facilitator". What do you think?

Jesse Groppi (talk)04:04, 4 August 2009

Jesse, I think you are correct, the facilitators are explained in the charter and probably do not need to be in the policy. I was not linking the two in my mind (I had read the charter a while back). I do think including the definition and linking to the charter do help clear up any confusion.

As for the "table" problem, the word dismiss works fine.

JohnWS 08:20, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

JohnWS (talk)20:20, 7 August 2009

Both were great suggestions, John!

Jesse Groppi (talk)13:01, 24 August 2009