Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
code4libcon
Home
+ new post
About this group
Join this group
Proposal to host code4lib2010 - Bloomington, IN
Options
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
   Messages 26 - 29 of 29 - Collapse all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals) < Older 
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Karen Schneider  
View profile  
 More options Feb 19 2009, 4:00 pm
From: Karen Schneider <kgschnei...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 16:00:31 -0500
Local: Thurs, Feb 19 2009 4:00 pm
Subject: Re: Proposal to host code4lib2010 - Bloomington, IN
Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

Actually, I am saying that, Jonathan.  We don't know how many organizations
would have submitted had they had another week or two to coordinate
arrangements.

I suspect it's a moot point because I won't be agreed with, but it doesn't
make me wrong.

As for the devil, he needs no advocate--he does quite well on his own.

Karen

--
--
| Karen G. Schneider
| Community Librarian
| Equinox Software Inc. "The Evergreen Experts"
| Toll-free: 1.877.Open.ILS (1.877.673.6457) x712
| k...@esilibrary.com
| Web: http://www.esilibrary.com
| Be a part of the Evergreen International Conference, May 20-22, 2009!
| http://www.solinet.net/evergreen

 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Roy Tennant  
View profile  
 More options Feb 19 2009, 4:07 pm
From: Roy Tennant <roytenn...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 13:07:00 -0800
Subject: Re: Proposal to host code4lib2010 - Bloomington, IN
Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
It looks like the vote will be to include the Bloomington proposal, so
this tells me that next year the deadline should be the day the vote
goes up, not before.
Roy


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Jonathan Rochkind  
View profile  
 More options Feb 19 2009, 4:18 pm
From: Jonathan Rochkind <rochk...@jhu.edu>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 16:18:00 -0500
Subject: Re: Proposal to host code4lib2010 - Bloomington, IN
Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
You know, I don't have strong feelings on it. I see both sides. I'd
withdraw my vote and abstain if it would make a difference, but I think
what ross really needs is just some decision one way or the other, not
more confusing arguments. I don't think it's a disaster either way.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Edward M. Corrado  
View profile  
 More options Feb 19 2009, 4:42 pm
From: "Edward M. Corrado" <ecorr...@ecorrado.us>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 16:42:21 -0500
Local: Thurs, Feb 19 2009 4:42 pm
Subject: Re: Proposal to host code4lib2010 - Bloomington, IN
Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
Not that it matters since Ross just put up the form, I can certainly see
both sides. Roy is correct when he asks why have deadlines if you will
ignore them, but on the other-hand, nothing has been set yet so it
isn't  like we would have to restart voting.

Code4Lib, for better and for worse [1], has acted in an informal way and
we seem to typically let these things slide. At last years conference I
brought up some reasons why it might be wise to not be so informal, but
while people kindly listened, very few people seemed to agree with me. I
think this incident shows one of the drawbacks of being so informal. Of
course there are many positives to our informality as well so I'm not
arguing to revisit that. Regardless, we have chosen to be informal, and
I think unless that decision (or lack of decision) changes, I think we
should follow our president, which is why earlier I said to include
Bloomington.

My guess is that the people that feel strongly against late submissions
will act accordingly in the voting booth.

Edward

[1] I'd argue mostly for better.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
End of messages < Older 
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »

Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2013 Google