Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Board resolution on Vertical Integration

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

I see "'failure', but rather ‘consensus was not found’" as two ways to say the 
same thing.  

I see failure as ok.  Failure is not a bad word we have to shy away from, but 
rather an opportunity we need to learn from.  I don't think avoiding the word 
helps in the learning process.  We set out to find consensus and falied to find 
it.  And I go further I do not think we can in this current constellation.

But with a break, with new realities on the ground, etc...  a reformed group 
may be able to find consensus.    I also recommend that we do a post-moretm on 
this group after the final report is submitted and determine why we failed.  
What we did right, what we did wrong and what should be done differently in the 
future.  As I understand it, this is part of the required follow through on any 
WG.

Hence my support of the proposed response put forward by our co-chairs.

a.




On 29 Sep 2010, at 10:55, Ron Andruff wrote:

> I agree wholeheartedly with Chuck and Brian that the issue here is not of 
> ‘failure’, but rather ‘consensus was not found’.  It is disappointing that 
> despite our best efforts we end up here, but the work has been done 
> seriously, diligently and respectfully, so I do not see any failure in that.  
> What matters now is that we discharge our duties as a WG consistent with our 
> Charter.  What happens after that is out of our hands. To not do what is 
> expected of us because of a view that others are not doing what is not 
> expected of them is not the way the social contract works. 
>  
> Clearly, as seen on the list, closure has not taken place yet and still needs 
> to be addressed, in my view.
>  
> Kind regards,
>  
> RA
>  
> Ronald N. Andruff
> RNA Partners, Inc.
>  
>