On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 09:12:54AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Redoing the new blood thing once again is unlikely to have much > of an effect, really. I think we need to find some of the root causes > of the malaise that affects this institution, and fix that, rather > than rampaging around rearranging things randomly like a bull in a china > shop. What do you believe these "root causes" are? Why do you think that structural to increase both external accountability will have no positivie effect? Why do you think that turnover within the committee, and the flexibility that brings both in regards to any personality disputes there may be, or any ingrained bad practices there may be, will have no positive effect? Given introducing new blood has already had positive effect, why do you believe it is unlikely more new blood will have any significant positive effect? Why do you think having two new members a year appointed by the DPL is "rampaging around like a bull in a china shop"? Cheers, aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature