RE: [soac-mapo] Revised draft Charter Terms of Reference for your review

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I do as well.

 

Chuck

 

From: owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 5:56 PM
To: soac-mapo
Subject: Re: [soac-mapo] Revised draft Charter Terms of Reference for your 
review

 

Well this Co-Chair  is certainly happy to declare the ToR final  (as stated 
below)  and get the substantiative work underway... 

 

So YES from me =>  and I assume Chuck and Heather/Frank will respond shortly as 
well (it is early a.m. here in the antipodes for Frank and I remember)

 
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
(CLO)




2010/8/27 Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>


May I suggest that, considering the overall support we have for the current 
version of the ToR with Avri's and my edits, the co-chairs call time on this 
and declare the ToR final so that we move on?

Stéphane

Le 26 août 2010 à 14:48, Alan Greenberg a écrit :


>
> I agree. I actually think that the word "preliminary" was the right word. 
> This is a tough problem that has been discussed for several years. Perhaps we 
> will come up with an inspired solution to it in next three weeks (which is 
> when September 13th is). Or not. If we have some indication of a direction 
> that will work, we will need to tell the Board. Setting tight constraints is 
> an effective mechanism to get people to produce, but it is not magic and 
> cannot be guaranteed to work - VI is the proof if we needed one. So we need 
> to keep our options flexible.
>
> Based on experiences in other groups, if we wanted a final report for the 
> 13th, we should really have a draft already to allow for the inevitable 
> discussions over both major and detailed wording. But we have not yet even 
> started the substantive discussion.
>
> So let's agree to this middle ground and get to the real work.
>
> Alan
>
>
> At 26/08/2010 07:31 AM, Jon Nevett wrote:
>
>> Let's go with the current draft that includes Stephane's deletion and Avri's 
>> addition and move on to the substance.  Thanks.  Jon
>