On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 04:20:30PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Apr 2008 13:21:52 -0400, Mike O'Connor <stew@vireo.org> said:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 09:43:28AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> On Tue, 1 Apr 2008 05:43:47 -0400, Mike O'Connor <stew@vireo.org>
> >> said:
> >>
> >> > I saw multiple people suggesting such limits. I did NOT see anyone
> >> > propose a reason for such a limit other than you who seemed to be
> >> > concluding that the reason for a limit was the speed at which
> >> > people were performing their job. I was just proposing an
> >> > alternate reason to yours. If the proposers of such limits had
> >> > stated that they think it would aid in the speed at which things
> >> > got done, they eluded me.
> >>
> >> That is not quite right. I have not presumed to know what reasons
> >> other people might have had for limits, nor did I propose a rationale
> >> for limits; I have merely expressed my opinion about one cause for
> >> the deficiencies in the tech ctte's performance. I have suggested
> >> that this cause (lack of time pr participation) has an observable
> >> metric, and that metric could be used to aid decisions about the
> >> composition of the cotte, rather than just setting some arbitrary
> >> limits.
>
> > well you clearly stated that you thought the proposal to limit the
> > number of hats was silly "Because the number of hats does not seem to
> > be a good predictor for performance..." I was just trying to suggest
> > this is not the only reason that one might want to suggest such a
> > limit. You seem to agree that my reason sounds valid, so I guess your
> > previous reason for thinking it to be a silly proposal is no longer
> > relevant, so we can drop it...
>
> You evidently have trouble reading what I said. I have never
> ever stated anything about speed, as you quote shows. And then,
> after misreading my stance, you proceed to knock down an argument never
> made -- in logic, this is known as a strawman.
>
You are mistaken. I should have included more of the quote, where you
definately talk about speed. Here is the entire paragraph:
Because the number of hats does not seem to be a good predictor
for performance -- at least, not for a low number of hats. There are
better objective measure that would ensure hastening of the glacial
pace and lack of follow through th tech ctte has.
Note the words "hastening" and "glacial pace". I don't think i'm having
trouble reading this.
stew
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature