Re: [atlarge-discuss] WG-Outreach Secretariat considerations

[espresso@e-scape.net]

At 05:43 -0700 2002/10/24, Jeff Williams wrote:
>All WG-Outreach participants,
>
>  Due to some exchanges on the Discuss list I am also cc'ing this post
>to the discuss list so as to keep every one not participating in
>WG-Outreach up to date on this issue and other issues regarding
>WG positions.

If you are going to do so. please do so fairly.

To date, WG-Outreach has received the following nominations for the position of Outreach Chair:
  Richard Henderson (proposed by J.-F.C. Morfin, seconded by J. Mermelstein)
  Sotiris Sotiropoulos (proposed by J. Williams, seconded by ?)
  
>  Recently Judyth has been suggested and self suggested to be
>the WG-Outreach Secretariat.  I questioned that self determination
>as a matter of good procedure.  I do wish to reiterate as I did
>to Judyth, that I have no problem in particular with her being the
>Secretariat.  Judyth expressed in that exchange that literacy was
>a concern of hers as to whom "Should" be the secretariat.  I agreed
>as I am assuming everyone else in the WG-Outreach does also.

1) I did indeed offer to serve as recording secretary for WG-Outreach.
   I also offered (twice) to defer to the wishes of the committee if they choose to make the job an elective one. Thus far, nobody but Jeff has registered an opinion on the subject.

2) My concerns about literacy (as most of you surely realize) were in the context of the needing people to check over carefully any documents destined for the Web site, so as to present some degree of professionalism on the part of the organization. 
   They did not by any means suggest that nobody else was qualified to be secretary of WG-Outreach or any other committee -- though I do have personal reservations about the organization's official minutes and correspondence being handled by a person with below-average literacy in the language of the material.

>  My question(s) to Judyth regarding this literacy concern or potential
>requirement is how do we make such a determination? and Whom
>and what make such a decision?  Do we have a Literacy Test such
>as USG departments do?  Or is there some other method by which
>we make this literacy determination?

My own response is that this group includes a large number of intelligent people who are capable of deciding for themselves without the need for an exam. Many of the people here are more literate in English as their second language than some native speakers of English. I would trust the group to appoint or elect qualified people to all positions within the organization.

>  To follow on on this Literacy concern that Judyth perhaps rightly
>expressed, I personally believe it is a concern that is not all that
>important to this WG-Outreach as there are only a few members
>of WG-Outreach are not well versed English speakers good enough
>for our WG-Outreach, purposes.  Do any of the WG-Outreach
>participants disagree with this observation?  If so, can you please
>let us all know whom those you believe that are native or good enough
>English speakers are so we can all be aware of such and be better
>able to address our posts as well as other communications amongst
>the WG-Outreach participants.
>
>Thank you in advance for everyone's cooperation and consideration
>on this seemingly important matter...

I eagerly await other responses to this.

Regards,

Judyth

##########################################################
Judyth Mermelstein     "cogito ergo lego ergo cogito..."
Montreal, QC           <espresso@e-scape.net>
##########################################################
"A word to the wise is sufficient. For others, use more."
##########################################################



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de