topic Process

[WHITNEMR@snymorva.cs.snymor.edu]

   However, if this is followed up on, people will more than likely be able
to use it almost every year to try and get topics they don't like off the
ballot.  If people don't like those topics the answer is simple. Don't vote
for them.  This tempest in a teapot is taking on a life of its own. Remember
what topic selection used to be like?  A committee would meet sometime,
somewhere, and a list of topics would emerge for us to vote on (kind of like
the state budget in New York). This topic committee has been the most open 
ever. They accepted volumes of input from the list (oops, I guess that raises
all those validity questions because not everyone is a member of the list),
put out daily reports on progress and asked for and accepted more input,
and replied quickly to concerns. But it seems that no matter what lengths they
go to, they can't win.

   When I say Tim has come up with a valid way to refute the topics he doesn't like, that doesn't mean I agree with his interpretation. Whether you label it
"chunking," or a "ladder of abstraction," or whatever, these topics can easily
fit under the original topic area.

   Congratulations to the topic committee for a marvelous job.

                                Mark Whitney
                                SUNY Morrisville

---

• Prev by Date: topics and the constitution
• Next by Date: CEDA-L Digest 957 topic comments -Reply
• Prev by thread: topics and the constitution
• Next by thread: CEDA-L Digest 957 topic comments -Reply
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page