Dee:

I don't think you have to explain. It is plain that those against change
are into the ploy of attack the person advancing the change, list
everything wrong, submit NO ideas for change, ignore, play dumb, hope it
all goes away, keep it a close door group, etc, etc...

You really don't have to take time to explain, we can work withing that
framework...

John

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 18:16:25 -0400, Dee Flint wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 18:20:07 -0400 Dee Flint
wrote:

| How?

| How?

| How?

| How?

| How?

| How?

| How?

Remind me not to hire you in a job that requires figuring things out.


I was poking fun at the person who says we must do such and so without
offering any solutions of his own. He's trying to throw it "over the fence"
to some one else to solve. When I identify problems, I come to the table
with several possible solutions to debate and welcome input from all
participants. But I do not particularly care for the approach of some one
saying "its a problem but YOU do the work."


| These principals are all well and good but propose some specific,
concrete
| actions.

Don't expect the directions, and the means to get there, to always come
from
the same person. First decide where you are going. That in itself may be
a
long complex decision process. Then decide how to get there. If you find
you can't get there, then go back and decide on another place to go.


I do not have any such expectations. He has identified problems that not
everyone agrees are problems and is "dumping" them in the laps of everyone
else to solve.


| I seriously doubt if the course will be all that clear. Ten different
| people are going to have ten different needs and ideas.

And why not hear them all out?


No problem with hearing them out but when you have ten different and quite
possibly opposing expectations, needs, and wants there is no way that
everyone is going to be satisfied with the results. This is demonstrated on
an almost daily basis.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE