<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [council] PDP timelines
- To: "'Bruce Tonkin'" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [council] PDP timelines
- From: "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 22:05:52 -0500
- In-reply-to: <57AD40AED823A7439D25CD09604BFB540238DCA1@balius.mit>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcYRWnDFEIPFjqbBTI2eOXVF9RkaYQAIliwQAAROv+AAAlBxUAADZ+Pw
Your comments and those I made seem similar in outcome.
Marilyn
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 8:32 PM
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [council] PDP timelines
Hello Marilyn,
>
> As to whether a drop dead date is the right answer, one has
> to be very mature in consideration of policy development.
> Sometimes, the right answer is 'not now, but perhaps in the
> future", and schedule a "next assessment".
>
> Perhaps that is what you are recommending -- I wasn't sure.
>
A PDP ties up significant staff and community resources. I am proposing
that a particular PDP conclude after a certain drop dead date if
agreement can't be reached. To start again would require the full
process for initiating a PDP - formal vote and prioritisation.
It would certainly be appropriate to consider putting a matter on hold,
and reviewing it again at some future date (perhaps after public
policy/laws become clearer on a matter for example, or when further
technical developments arise).
It is a similar process for companies doing development or R&D. They
allocate resources for a particular project for a particular period (and
cost).
Regards,
Bruce Tonkin
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|