Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Fwd: 97 Code is a Life Safety Standard

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
In a message dated 9/25/1999 2:46:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Seaintonln 
writes:

<< Subj:    Re: 97 Code is a Life Safety Standard
 Date:  9/25/1999 2:46:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time
 From:  <A HREF="mailto:Seaintonln";>Seaintonln</A>
 To:    <A HREF="mailto:mtv(--nospam--at)skilling.com">mtv(--nospam--at)skilling.com</A>
 
 Mike,
 However preferable face to face meetings are, the policy eliminated a hugh 
part of our profession who may wish to volunteer but unable to participate 
because of committee scheduled time (during working hours in most cases), 
distance (the volunteers inability to cover the distance to the meeting for 
any number of reasons).
 
 Seismology is a popular committee. I don't believe that there is a problem 
with participation from any of the local chapters, but what of other 
committees like the Computer Applications Commitee,  Disaster Emergency 
Services Committee, Education, Existing Buildings, House, Professional 
Practice, Online etc. None of these committees are so rich in volunteers that 
we could not use the additional help. To suggest that a virtal committee can 
not be integrated into a physical committee does the process by which this 
Listservice survives a disservice.
 
 I believe strongly that the disconntent brewing from the threads on this 
list as well as the participation of those policy makers who finally found 
their way to the virtual community, was sufficiently strong enough to be a 
contributer to the comprimises that are currently underway in the Seismology 
committee.
 
 Your argument is valid, but it only an opinion from one side. To do justice 
to the virtual community, you need to be willing to create a working 
relationship between the virtual and the physical and determine it's sucess 
after it has been giving the opportune trial.
 
 My personal opinion is that your comments about body language, line of sight 
etc are valid only because you have no other source of reference. The 
advantage is that there is a larger container of resourses at our disposal. I 
would be very hard pressed to negate the importance of this without further 
investigation and trials.
 
 Dennis 
 
 
 In a message dated 9/24/1999 5:21:08 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
mtv(--nospam--at)skilling.com writes:
 
 << Given that hundreds of 
  important issues are at stake, we must use the most efficient medium 
  for the discussions.  This is the compelling reason that all 
  committee work is not conducted in writing.
  
  While I believe that significant contributions can be made in writing 
  and via modern methods, an ancient proverb says "there is a 
  frustrating of plans where there is no confidential talk, but in the 
  multitude of counselors there is accomplishment."  This is still true 
  today.
  
  -Mike >>
  >>

--- Begin Message ---
Mike,
However preferable face to face meetings are, the policy eliminated a hugh 
part of our profession who may wish to volunteer but unable to participate 
because of committee scheduled time (during working hours in most cases), 
distance (the volunteers inability to cover the distance to the meeting for 
any number of reasons).

Seismology is a popular committee. I don't believe that there is a problem 
with participation from any of the local chapters, but what of other 
committees like the Computer Applications Commitee,  Disaster Emergency 
Services Committee, Education, Existing Buildings, House, Professional 
Practice, Online etc. None of these committees are so rich in volunteers that 
we could not use the additional help. To suggest that a virtal committee can 
not be integrated into a physical committee does the process by which this 
Listservice survives a disservice.

I believe strongly that the disconntent brewing from the threads on this list 
as well as the participation of those policy makers who finally found their 
way to the virtual community, was sufficiently strong enough to be a 
contributer to the comprimises that are currently underway in the Seismology 
committee.

Your argument is valid, but it only an opinion from one side. To do justice 
to the virtual community, you need to be willing to create a working 
relationship between the virtual and the physical and determine it's sucess 
after it has been giving the opportune trial.

My personal opinion is that your comments about body language, line of sight 
etc are valid only because you have no other source of reference. The 
advantage is that there is a larger container of resourses at our disposal. I 
would be very hard pressed to negate the importance of this without further 
investigation and trials.

Dennis 


In a message dated 9/24/1999 5:21:08 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
mtv(--nospam--at)skilling.com writes:

<< Given that hundreds of 
 important issues are at stake, we must use the most efficient medium 
 for the discussions.  This is the compelling reason that all 
 committee work is not conducted in writing.
 
 While I believe that significant contributions can be made in writing 
 and via modern methods, an ancient proverb says "there is a 
 frustrating of plans where there is no confidential talk, but in the 
 multitude of counselors there is accomplishment."  This is still true 
 today.
 
 -Mike >>

--- End Message ---