Yes, I really like your suggestion David. Introductions sounds so much nicer. I suppose I just don't like the idea of having to pass some notional entry test. I realise that in practice it doesn't work like that but I don't like the feel of it. "Introductions".. fine [and polite].......... yes..... what do people think? Heather
________________________________
From: DAVID Cowan [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Fri 09/02/2007 20:22
To: Hopfl, Heather J; [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The Nomination Procedure
I respect your request, Heather, although I do appreciate learning a bit
about each person who joins. Ultimately, I am less interested in
learning about any particular individual as much as I am interested in
understanding the composition of our membership as well as the various
projects/activities/explorations that define our eclectic terrain.
Perhaps we could reframe "nominations" to "introductions"? Mindfully,
David C.
>>> "Hopfl, Heather J" <[log in to unmask]> 02/09/07 2:57 PM >>>
Dear All
Why don't we stop the endless nominations and let anyone who is
interested in the research network join. I have not seen one nomination
that anyone might object to and there are so many worthy people who are,
it seems, interested in joining the network. I would be delighted if
the procedure were simplified. Personally, I think nominations are
undignified and often it makes people sound like exhibits - with all the
parading of virtues which normination seems to require. I would say all
are welcome and have done with it. Perhaps there are good reasons for
the procedure of which I am unaware - in which case, I would say let
any two members propose membership to the network holder and membership
become automatic.
Good Wishes,
Heather Hopfl
University of Essex
|