Re: topic selection process

[Glenn Ellingson <gellings@niu.edu>]

Except for the last sentance, I think this is an excellent idea. Ideally, 
topic papers will exist for all topic areas & each will include a full 
slate of resolutions; each resolution on the ballot will ideally be 
represented in the original topic paper, or if the idea arises in 
response to that paper the "late" resolution will be backed up by wording 
papers ASAP (as I think happened this time; the problem was that ASAP was July).

But, I question the wisdom of giving the one author a veto over the topic 
committee (and thus the membership). The author already has the 
opportunity to persuade the topic committe based upon the original paper 
and any other research they perform. If the paper rocks and/or the author 
is the unchallenged expert on the subject, I'm sure they will get their 
point across.

In addition, this really doesn't help the membership get a better idea of 
what they are voting for, unless we all can read the mind of the topic 
paper author.

As I think Tuna said at one point, this year's process was crammed into a 
very short period of time, thus the role of topic papers was smaller than 
it probably will be  next year (especially if his by-law amendment to 
spread out the process is adopted). I suspect that almost everyone would 
like to see more & larger topic papers, more wording papers, etc. (this 
is not to take ANYTHING away from the topic papers that were submitted 
this year... it just seems logical that a couple of papers on a subject 
would be even better, etc.).

-- Glenn

---

• Prev by Date: Proposal for NDT topic.
• Next by Date: topics and cold feet
• Prev by thread: topic selection process
• Next by thread: korcok the respectable
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

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