[eagle] Re: A wild thought
w5did at amsat.org
Tue Jan 2 19:03:37 PST 2007
The concern that I have is that we end up spending an inordinate
amount of time and resources bring people up to speed. As you know
that can completely disrupt the process.
If you want to bring in additional people I suggest you bring them in
sooner rather than later.
w5did at mac.com
On Jan 2, 2007, at 9:35 PM, Jim Sanford wrote:
> I agree. And the issue you raise is a BIG one. I have seen good
> reviews turn into a complete waste due simply to having too many
> qualified people involved in one evolustion at the same time.
> thanks & 73,
> Robert McGwier wrote:
>> I completely believe in openness. There has been some grumbling
>> the small peer review groups but this has more to do with unwieldy
>> meetings on these low bandwidth VoIP tools we are using than it does
>> with secrecy. I support this completely. I also suggest that we
>> an official scribe at each peer review to take down detailed notes of
>> our peer review sessions to post on EaglePedia. Again, the size is
>> about efficiency, not closedness. We would welcome comments from
>> Jim Sanford wrote:
>>> I've been thinking about this for a while. Recent publicity for
>>> Eagle in multiple publications has resurrected the thought, so I
>>> your comments.
>>> I'm considering seeking, for each discrete peer review, an
>>> review team member from AMSAT membership at large.
> Via the Eagle mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA
> Eagle at amsat.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Eagle