IS/SRR Call for Incubator Site Requirements for Low Cash Collaborative Space Venture Startup
Michael R. Irwin
I have been investigating starting up
a space venture incubator site for a client
who is currently keeping me well fed
and supplied with the necessities of life.
SRR - System Requirements Review
I have some of my own opinions as regular
readers have probably noticed but I and
my investment team are intensely interested
in what this groups readers think would be
an appropriate set of goals, objectives,
policys, methods, techniques, services,
trinket lines, etc. for the site to interest
space activists in becoming self training
space entrepreneurs and billionaires.
I realize that after we successfully produce
ten or twenty billionaires from a couple of
successful startups that the challenge to
attract mindshare and participation will be much reduced.
The really interesting phase we wish to address
at this time is getting neophytes started making
money and improving financial positions so they
have the freedom necessary to contribute in
really large ways in the near future. Simultaneously
we must generate enough benefits to attract the experience
warhorses we need to generate positive cashflows immediately
and net profits within 6 months to 3 years.
Any thoughts any one wishes to express are
extremely welcome, particularly entertaining
slams of weak reasoning or devestating witty
logic bombing or scientific or engineeirng data presentation
contrary to wishful thinking.
Requirements page intentionally left blank
at this time. Feel free to bring crayons
to appropriately created subthreads, a free
ranging shakeout of functional requirements is
desired at this time. My team of entrepreneurs
is capable of prioritizing and apple polishing so
please do not be bashful, let us get everything
we can in the draft requirements matrix.
Thank you in advance for your assistance.
In return my investors are willing to allow me
to assist anyone with openly analyzing business
concepts and word smithing components for executive
summaries for space ventures or space settlement related
government departments.
Regards,
Mike Irwin, qda ct7t13
irrational optimalizer
Julian Treadwell
Goals and objectives: 1- the creation of self-sustaining, autonomous
communities in space habitats and on the Moon, Mars and possibly other
planetary bodies; 2 - the establishment of profitable industries that
would exploit the mineral, tourism and scientific potential of non-Earth
environments.
Policies: 1 - no 'land-grab'; 2 - a U.N.-mandated 'space law', similar
to the laws governing international waters; 3 - no nuclear weapons in
space.
Methods and techniques: see Gerard O'Neill's text "The High Frontier".
His ideas were probably practical in the 70's when he wrote the
book,they certainly would be now.
Services: tourist flights to orbital space stations and later the Moon
etc; burials in space; geological surveys
Trinket lines: moonrock, space dust
Question: How much Venture Capital do you or your client have access
to?
I wish you all the best.
Michael R. Irwin
Julian Treadwell wrote:
>
<Snip excellent first man in potentially cold water with requirements
Thank you sir! Further response forthcoming after some additional
input from others.>
>
> Question: How much Venture Capital do you or your client have access
> to?
I personally control a college education and several years of
engineering and entrepreneurial experience. I have a few
obsolete computers and a lot of software.
I have an email list of approximately 30 interested professionals
with the sole critical experience gap being a solid web team.
I find that I can do two or three big jobs at a time but it
is difficult to shift between technical precision and creative
planning (irrational optimalizing, quantum dilemma analysis).
A personal defect hopefully corrected before a die but until
it is I must work around it.
I have some contacts that can materialize into a web team but
they want hard evidence of solid interest from doers vs. whiners
before they pull their bucket out of telecommunications soup storms
and put it under space related slightly cloudy skies.
>
> I wish you all the best.
Thank you! I have a plan outline of sorts, we shall
see how it plays out.
Thank you for your assistance, please check back
occasionally and if we get launched consider looking
over some of our venture teams for possible investment
opportunities.
Very high regards for your initiative sir,
it will be very helpful I assure you,
that you have chosen to start the dance.
Sincerely,
Mike Irwin
Michael R. Irwin
This mission statement post apparently did not go out
as I thought yesterday.
Draft Mission Statement possibilities
for "Space Venture Incubator".com (real name
confidential at this time until registered):
We play hard and fair to create entrepreneurs,
business models, and space related fractal
industries capable of settling space.
We collaboratively create open business and
engineering support services essential to grow
effective space bean counter teams.
We assist space entrepreneurs with creating
learning organizations and creating the wealth
necessary to settle space.
We provide a local water hole for space entrepreneurs
to self train, network, market and create outstanding venture teams.
We play hard and work fairly to assist entrepreneurial
teams with creating space related wealth and opportunity.
We play hard and fair to create capital and new wealth applicable
to human prosperity in space.
We play fair while creating new wealth for humanity in space.
We play fair while creating new wealth for humanity to invest
in local space time.
We play fair creating wealth invested in space related industries.
We play and mutually self train fairly while collaboratively
designing and implementing ventures essential to profitably settling
space.
We collaborate with self selected space entrepreneurs in open
design of ventures, equipment, and lifestyles in preparation
to excel at settling space or factoring space produced goods and
services.
We collaborate with stakeholders to create the industries
and wealth necessary to initiate self sustaining space settlements.
We build synergistic teams, wealth, and industry necessary to
design successful space ventures and settlements which provide
fair returns to all stakeholders.
Please feel free to mark up any of the above or
post your own suggested mission statements to
properly focus a space venture incubator.
Thanks,
Mike Irwin
Michael R. Irwin
No less than our own Mr. Mook has pointed out
that the use of undefined buzzwords is not useful.
I really like the term fractal and the scaling
imagery it provokes. I think it will be applicable
to successful space industries as we must send out
seeds and reap redwoods.
Therefore I propose to demonstrate the raw power
of crayons while defining this term in practical
terms for a widespread public while simultaneously
convincing potential investors that we (the space
venture teams) can bring back some bacon.
To do this we will create some knowledge by attempting
to create a simple chaotic system of free agents with
emergent behavior useful in getting hungry people fed
by others efforts in exchange for a chance to contribute
and feel good with a remote possibility of a profit.
Notice that this is strictly a charity distribution
system, no claims are made regarding production or
sales for profit (except for tools for the well heeled
self selected agent who choose to purchase rather than
waste time creating his own).
Ready?
If you prefer to run a literature search first try
the following keywords at google.com or fourbrain.com
or b4brain or something, they notified us a few weeks
ago they were forming an advanced index.
Possible key words: chaos theory, complex systems,
non-linear, chaordic, non-linear dynamics
Ok, here we go.
Fractal Food Bank Agents (tm,cc, 2000)
All rights released to the universe.
It would be appreciated if feedback regarding
local implementations were forwarded to:
mir...@harborside.com No spam please, I have plenty.
If someone wants to setup a dot.org website I would
appreciate it if you would consider joining our incubator
team and collaborating, if you choose to compete then
please learn about emergent behavior in non linear complex
systems and try to avoid impacting the free agents in
adverse ways detrimental to the systems non linear fractal
distributive properties.
capillaries pickup trucks
arteries big semi fleets, interstate highway
networks of freight aircraft
organs traditional local food banks
I would like to derive a set of recommended
operational guides that individual free agents
participating can use as a starting point and
bias appropriately as per their own adult judgement.
Perhaps someone can or will set up a web site to
support this or the capillary network will get
attacked to arteries, organs, or brain cells of
some kind, it is hard to say. Once you turn an
emergent system loose, its behavior emerges.
Let us focus for now on capillaries, if we are
successful then in a few months or years it will
become obvious that higher order activities might
be useful.
An artistic friend of mine was concerned that premature
attachement to other metaphysical construct might distort
the capillary functionality.
FRACTAL FOOD BANK AGENTs wanted and needed
Required: 1 Pickup truck
1 waterproof box easy to open and close
some non perishable food
Recommended agent behavior:
Put sign (painted stencil, magnetic, etc) on side of truck
in large print: FRACTAL FOOD BANK AGENT
Place the waterproof box in back of truck.
Post guidelines in back window in sight of the box and sign.
When convenient and you meet another Fractal Food Bank
Agent vehicle exchange half of your food bank for half
of his food bank. Local biases may need to vary so
use your best judgement. Some areas will produce surplus
while others produce deficits. Nevertheless the back and
forth mixing is critical for the system so we recommend
that you not shift too far from the median. Exchange
at least some if possible. Obviously half of zero is
zero.
When interfacing with existing brick and mortar food
banks or traditional food bank agents give only half
your load unless retiring your vehicle or location for
a while (say on vacation or simply busy for a while).
Try to exchange half loads with at least several other
Fractal Food Bank Agents if possible between dropping
half loads into traditional food banks. We support a
viable capillary structure before we assist too much
with traditional food banks or our system will fail.
If no other Fractal Food Bank Agent is available consider
encougaging other responsible adults with pickups to
participate. Recruiting materials may soon be available
or create your own. In a pinch email these guidlines to
an appropriate buddy with a cover letter extolling the
virtues of the system as you see it.
Stick with non perishables unless your own experience
and expertise applied is sufficient to safely operate
otherwise. We do not wish to assist anyone in
making themselves sick!
Use your own service occasionally. Serving your own
table will focus attention on details trying to avoid
Halloween candy type problems.
Recommended user behavior, should be posted
in large readable print either on sign or in
back window:
1.) Donators give more than you take.
2.) Please take something, if possible.
3.) Needy take more than you give.
4.) Please give something if possible.
(These rules make it less embarressing to accept
the charity as no one is certain who is giving
or taking. Also reduces and spreads risks.
Someone who attempts to poisen the mayor's daughter
is more likely to prosecuted to the full extent possible
than persecutors of the needy. Sad but often true.)
5.) Put a clean rock in food bank if it was
empty when you attempted to get some food. The
rock count will help us adjust the food transfers
in our system to send more food where it is needed
and less where it is not.
I welcome discussion on why these rules will work or
not work and other possible beneficial rules. Let
us get a basic system up and runnign before we try
to embellish by tying it into blood bank advertising
etc. This is still a very new engineering area.
If someone else wishes to scientifically study the
spread and success and failure of this system by
all means provide an email address for data drop.
Did you see the potential profit?
1.) Magnetic signs (I have a lovely C33 artwork perfect for this!)
2.) Sell the scientific data! Grant, etc. If you know a market
hurry! I am going to release this system within a few weeks. It
may already have escaped, I discuss it with several pickup men and
they really liked it. I will probably finally get my color printer
setup and print this draft set of rules and some artwork and take
them down for a pitcher tomorrow.
3.) Public recognition!
4.) Consulting on chaotic system design.
5.) Chaotic system design classes. Case study 1 Fractal Food Bank
6.) Foot in door to talk to:
a. Regional freightlines
b. International air freight
c. International ocean freight
regarding arterial and organ attachment.
7.) Sign stencils and fancy paint
By the way, one nice feature of this system is that since
pickups are more common in rural areas, we may get pretty
good coverage of all population areas despite thinner
populations in rural areas.
Fractal Food Bank Agents (TM,cp,2000) All rights released to the
universe.
"A Merry Christmas to all
and to all a good night!"
a fellow irrational optimalizer
Regards and thank you all for your time.
Mike Irwin
P.S. Let us clean this up a bit before we cross
post it. We want the other newsgroups to perceive
sci.space.policy wonks as valuable people to have
around.
P.S.2 I want no confusion as to where this system
orginated when it goes bigtime. If you assist in
no other way consider forwarding this message to
yourself so you have your very own date stamp to
back us up when we claim credit in subtle ways useful
to marketing space.
Michael R. Irwin
Julian Treadwell wrote:
>
> ? Ok, off the top of my head:
>
> Goals and objectives: 1- the creation of self-sustaining, autonomous
> communities in space habitats and on the Moon, Mars and possibly other
> planetary bodies; 2 - the establishment of profitable industries that
> would exploit the mineral, tourism and scientific potential of non-Earth
> environments.
>
> Policies: 1 - no 'land-grab'; 2 - a U.N.-mandated 'space law', similar
> to the laws governing international waters; 3 - no nuclear weapons in
> space.
>
> Methods and techniques: see Gerard O'Neill's text "The High Frontier".
> His ideas were probably practical in the 70's when he wrote the
> book,they certainly would be now.
Regarding technical ideas. Agreed. He lacked only motivated business
executives and investors demanding performance on a tight schedule.
>
> Question: How much Venture Capital do you or your client have access
> to?
Easy access:
Approximately 50 Million well educated American intenet users who
have proven abilities to learn how to turn on a computer and keep
their internet access funded. Most have other talents if cultivated
properly. Unfortunately the very best are usually very busy. The
challenge then is to organize effectively to use the knowledge available
to create new wealth and iteratively invest it effectively.
Less Easy access:
50 Million other international internet users. Same as above.
Difficult access:
6.3 Human beings with limited or no internet access. Obviously
we will work through some easy challenges before jumping in to
assist with wiring the rest of the planet so we can have access
to a portion of this additional mindshare.
Example business outline.
Since we are a low cash startup VC firm we will be
looking for business plans and venture opportunities
that meet some criteria:
DRAFT
1.) Little capital required for initial startup
2.) Positive cashflow and net profits are near term
if not immediate.
3.) Growth potential exists in the concept through
cooperation, collaboration, etc.
4.) Other benefits are available besides cash that
are applicable to building space related ventures.
5.) Some cross over fertilization or recruiting potential
is present. (This is necessary to expand the commons.)
Remember we are growing toward leaping over quantum dilemmas.
If someone learns how to subdivide the quantum GREAT!, otherwise
we take an economy, ecology, and society with us when we go
to settle, go far, and stay at desirable locations.
Example:
Quasar Quencher, Quasar Quellar, Q Squared
(open engineered super soakers)
Phase 1. Design around existing plastic bottles commonly
available anywhere USA products are sold.
Web site provides drawings and bom, makes money on web traffic.
Kits can be assembled by paying a set bounty price to recyclers
for clean intact containers.
Business opportunity for small manufacturer to provide low price,
low volume, kits to convert recycled goods on bom into product.
Encourage site membership to invest profits in expansion, slightly
larger ventures, or public space involved corporations.
Phase 2. Approach the big guys about engineering components
that meet their packaging requirements while being easily
assembled into products.
Establish plastic molding operation to supply plastic
containers at profit to big guys.
Buy the deposit returned packaging wholesale for assembly
into product.
Approach Hollywood and big guys about promotion, get assistance
from greenies.
IOW We start with pennies and grow some nickels, nickels to dimes,
etc.
I know everyone would like to start at the top in the billions. This
is possible by going to some traditional VCs and jumping through the
appropriate hoops. Personally I think a large effort will be required
similar to other settlement waves in history and I would just as soon
start
at the fundamental level and create a niche and approach I like.
At a minimum a million dollar operation built from scratch provides
expertise in business and should provide some credibility for the
VCs that the venture team has some idea of what it is doing from a
business standpoint.
An advantage our site will provide is a friendly/hostile prototyping
logical review facility, foot traffic (potential customers), and
contacts
for rapid expansion and operational experience once the bugs are worked
out of venture plans. Another advantage is the rapid establishment of
fractal industries that could simultaneously startup and then merge
effective operations into one medium to large firm under the venture
team that like manufacturing "quasar queller" components for say:
Procter & Gamble and selling kits to McDonald's for distribution to
future space entrepreneurs. Other teams that have been bought or
gone passive with only stock in portfolios can move on to new space
related ventures with some solid experience in plastics, manufacturing,
engineering, marketing, distribution, sells, shipping, etc. Much
of this will be appicable to plastic components of all types in
space settlements.
Let's say the quasar quencher becomes one of our initial cash lines.
Perhaps it will even spawn 20 or 30 competing teams if we are a bit
feeble at the start in producing draft business models easy to tailor
to the individual entrepreneurs and venture team's preferences.
How much cash flow potential does this provide? Well water guns in
the U.S.A range in price from a couple of bucks up to twenty or thirty
at the high end. If we can design a product that pays a nickel to
the neighborhood kids or a school service club for washed intact plastic
bottles and put 10 in each product:
Bottles: 50 cents
Silicon: 50 cents
plastic hose: 50 cents
custom parts and check valves: 100 cents
paint, glitter, etc. 100 cents
Total parts cost: $3.50
Labor assembly $2.50
(assume 10/hr)
Product is sold for 19.95 plus shipping and handling.
How many must be sold to buy a plastics molding factory
in preparation for phase 2?
Clearly this will not replace a day job until phase 1
is extremely mature and ready to move to phase 2, however,
it is a self financing venture and can be at least as
entertaining as TV, not to mention providing a means for
your offspring to begin assisting in providing their own
stock portfolio to assist with finance of college education.
Americans try this experiment:
Estimate the plastic bottles thrown away from your household
in 6 months. Multiply by the number of houses in your
suburb. Count the number of thirty dollar super soakers
in play on a hot summer day in a nearby public park or on
display in a local toy store. Maybe we sell to the toy
store instead of direct, in this case figure the wholesale
price as half the list price.
Regards,
Mike Irwin
Michael R. Irwin
data and tips to anybody who wants it
for free!!!!!
I wonder what is in it for them?
Perhaps we can query the number of people
involved in the newsletter and get some
advertising by sending them enough
quasar quenchers to go around the staff
and a thank you note for their assistance
in helping us self create some space related
venture opportunities for ourselves.
This technique will also be useful for the
recycling newsletters, it will no doubt encourage
them in their efforts to develop plastic corn
and biodiesal to receive some appropriate thanks
from other groups in appreciation for their contribution
to mankind in general and space settlement in general.
Space settlement? Can you think of a more fractal
recyclable approach to plastic components than burning
the surplus in the greenhouse for the plastic corn
to generate raw feedstock for the standard plastics
components factory for manufacturing on demand?
One industry loops all requirements if one merely
stores some scrap, has a greenhouse and sunlight source,
and modulates demand to avoid exceeding scheduled or
stored supply.
Later we can learn how to add intermediate bubble
trays if they look efficient and profitable.
Regards,
Mike Irwin
Newsletter in its entirely follows:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
T H E I B O O S T E B U S I N E S S N E W S L E T T E R
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Issue 29 / 12-21-00
iBoost Technology, Inc.
'The Power Behind eBusiness (tm)'
http://www.iboost.com
NOTE: Please accept our sincerest apologies if this newsletter
was sent to you in error. Information for unsubscribing can be
found at the bottom of the email.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
c o n t e n t s
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1. t h e e d i t o r ' s d e s k
eHoliday Spending Cracks 7 Billion
2. n e w i n e b u s i n e s s
Implementing a Web Site Quality Control Plan
Launch Your E-Commerce Site... After Reading This!
Weekly Poll: "Which of the following do you most want for
Christmas?"
Weekly Poll Results: "What contributes most to poor Flash
usability?"
3. q u i c k t i p s ? t r i c k s
Four Blunders to Ignore
4. s p r e a d t h e w o r d !
-----------------------------------------------------------------
p o w e r f u l s o f t w a r e
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SpinBox - Because your content is always changing! SpinBox is a
stand-alone hardware/software solution which can rotate any Web-
compatible file, from advertisements to video files to text
documents. SpinBox includes powerful targeting, simple
management, and extensive versatility. SpinBox also has a
solution for your needs from as low as $149.00 per month.
Click here for more information:
http://www.spinbox.com/index2.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1 . t h e e d i t o r ' s d e s k
-----------------------------------------------------------------
eHoliday Spending Cracks 7 Billion
Greetings:
What eCommerce slump?
According to the latest figures, eShoppers have spent a total of
$7.2 billion online since November 5th, more than double the $3.3
billion consumers spent during the same period a year ago.
Online shoppers spent about $1.5 billion during the week ending
Dec. 10, up from $1.3 billion in the previous week, according to
the study.
Results further show in 1999, the majority of eHoliday spending
occurred in the first part of December, but this year spending
started in early November and has continued unabated, topping the
$1 billion mark for five consecutive weeks.
The Top 10 online consumer spending categories for week ending
December 10th were Apparel ($213,557), Electronics ($200,756),
Computer hardware ($200,393), Toys ($138,460), Travel ($123,981),
Books ($71,807), Pet supplies ($65,024), Personal accessories
($64,240), Games software ($46,084) and Videos/DVD ($41,120).
As for the percentage of gift spending for that same week, Toys
led the way with 84.0%, followed by Games software (62.2%),
Personal accessories (62.0%), Apparel (57.4%), Electronics
(57.3%), Books (52.4%), Videos/DVD (44.7%), Computer hardware
(24.8%), Travel (17.6%), and Pet supplies (15.1%).
Last week, according to another survey, eShoppers spent another
$1.5 billion as sales surged 61% from $919.9 million in the same
week a year earlier, including $247.7 million worth of orders
rung up last Wednesday, the biggest shopping day of the year.
During that week, toy sales almost tripled their performance from
last year, while computer sales almost doubled, rising 46%.
As for the final sales tally, eHoliday spending predictions for
2000 have ranged from $9 billion (Yankee Group) to $12.5 billion
(eMarketer and the NPD Group).
With sales already over $7 billion, the final tally will probably
fall somewhere between those two predictions.
Until next week, please enjoy the rest of the newsletter.
Source: PC Data Online ? BizRate
Best regards:
Tom Ahearn
News Editor
http://www.iboost.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------
2 . n e w i n e b u s i n e s s
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Implementing a Web Site Quality Control Plan
by Peter Cooper
Help ensure the success of your site by implementing a quality
control plan now.
http://www.iboost.com/promote/marketing/branding/20022.htm
Launch Your E-Commerce Site... After Reading This!
by Peter Cooper
One needs to think twice before starting an eCommerce venture in
these volatile times for Internet businesses. Peter tells you
some things you need to consider before launching your site.
http://www.iboost.com/profit/selling_products_or_services/getting_started/30025.htm
Weekly Poll: "Which of the following do you most want for
Christmas?"
Vote at http://www.iboost.com
Weekly Poll Results: "What contributes most to poor Flash
usability?"
Long loading times (47.7%)
Flash sites unusable by nature (17.2%)
Gratuitous animations (11.3%)
Unintuitive navigation (9.5%)
Absence of preloader (7.5%)
Browser incompatibility (6.5%)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
i n s t a n t o n l i n e s u p p o r t
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bring your online support to life with WebHelp Live!
This quick-to-implement, easy-to-use, best-value chat solution
gives your online customers the ability to initiate a personal
chat conversation from your Web site with service, support or
sales agents, when and where they need assistance.
FREE White Paper- Visit eHelp today:
http://www.ehelp.com/WebHelpLive/webadv/whl.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------
3 . q u i c k t i p s ? t r i c k s
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Four Mistakes Not to Ignore
Is your eBusiness Web site effective? Does it grab the interest
of casual visitors, pull them in, and lead to sales? Here are a
few common mistakes in terms of marketing that Web sites make.
Mistake No. 1: Your company name heads your Web site.
What's wrong with this? If your audience asks "Who cares?" and
"So what?", then you have a problem. Assume your visitors have
never heard of you and provide the information they would want.
In other words, tell visitors what you do, not just who you are.
Mistake No. 2: Your Web site is unfocused.
Who is your site for? If you don't know, how do you expect your
visitors to feel? Crystallize your target audience. If your site
has more than one audience, don't try to satisfy all with one set
of instructions. Make sure your language clarifies, not confuses.
Mistake No. 3: Your navigation is too cute.
Keep the wording of the navigation buttons for your site short
and simple. Web users don't click on what they can't understand.
Clear, precise labels attract more traffic than mysterious ones.
Mistake No. 4: Your customers know what they want.
Most Web sites present their products by categories broken down
by brand, model and, of course, cool "technical" stuff. But what
about shoppers intimidated by all of these features and jargon?
Help your visitors find the products they would be happy with.
All of the above should help you turn visitors into customers.
Source: ClickZ
Tip by Tom Ahearn, News Editor of iBoost.com.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
y o u r . t v d o m a i n f o r o n l y $ 1 0 0 !
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Build your Web site with a cool new .tv domain.
.tv names are now available!
Click here now:
http://ads16.focalink.com/SmartBanner/page?23101.3-INSERT_TIME_DATE_STAMP_HERE
-----------------------------------------------------------------
4 . s p r e a d t h e w o r d !
-----------------------------------------------------------------
iBoost hopes you have enjoyed this newsletter and found it to be
both informative and entertaining. Please forward this email to
any of your friends or colleagues who might be interested in us.
If you received this newsletter from someone else and wish to
subscribe, visit http://www.iboost.com/info/newsletters.htm or
click mailto:join-eb...@ripple.dundee.net and return the
email. If you have any ideas on how to improve this newsletter,
feel free to share them with me at mailto:tah...@iboost.com.
Thank you.
Newsletter Producer: Tom Ahearn
iBoost Web site: http://www.iboost.com
Sponsorship: mailto:sa...@iboost.com
Copyright 2000, iBoost Technology, Inc. All rights reserved.
---
You are currently subscribed to webmaster as: mir...@harborside.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
leave-webmas...@lyris.dundee.net
Jim Benson
<mir...@harborside.com> was forced by men in trench coats to say:
>Sorry all,
>
>This mission statement post apparently did not go out
>as I thought yesterday.
>
[snip] blah, blah, blah
>
>Thanks,
>Mike Irwin
.<yAWn>.
Scott Lowther
>
> Sorry all,
>
> This mission statement post apparently did not go out
> as I thought yesterday.
>
> Draft Mission Statement possibilities
> for "Space Venture Incubator".com (real name
> confidential at this time until registered):
How about:
"We're really too damned busy doing science and hard engineering to
think up mission statements."
Michael R. Irwin
Spoofer alert. I find it hard to believe
that a responsible CEO would actually send
this message. Now to spoofer response.
and thanks for your support alleged Jim.
You must excel at developing markets and
customers with this helpful attitude
towards self proclaimed potential customers.
Perhaps one of your spacecraft designers
can figure out how to help you kill file
my posts. They are all clearly labeled
as sent from: Michael R. Irwin.
Have a nice U.S.G. market startup, try not
to waste too much time yawning at nobodies.
Do not wait for us, we plan to bring
our markets, investers, and suppliers with us;
including the real Jim Bensen and SpaceDev if
they are not too busy with real or alternate
alleged customers.
With less regard for your entrepreneurial
and spoofer skills than I had a bit ago.
Getting close to retirement? Maybe need
that profit in next the few years or not at all?
Growth curves are interesting to ponder.
Once merely needs a large coefficient,
starting base, or exponent to meet a given
time constraint.
Of course various associative and superposition
priciples assure us that specific targets can
often be met via a variety of summed components
in various permutations.
Mike Irwin
P.S. Did I misunderstand? Are you proposing
as a mission statement capable of focusing a
large effort in space related entrepreneurialism
training and startup support as:
"Blah! Blah! Blah!" ?
P.S.2 If it is not classified, or even if it
is maybe the public one will suffice, could
you share SpaceDev's mission statement with
us and add a few words why you think it works
well or alternatively tell us why you have not
bothered updating it even though you do not
really care for it?
End Spoofer alert response.
Michael R. Irwin
This is not bad for an engineering group.
We may wish to rephrase it a bit. One of the
market's current concerns seems to be the traditional
Aerospace industries ability to absorb resources without
delivering useful results.
How about?
Draft Mission Statement: Lowther Engineering
We do the damned difficult hard science and engineering
necessary to meet your marketing departments promises to
your customers with sufficient efficiency to allow you
to make a profit.
No, too long. Need concision for good advertising use.
How about:
Hard science and engineering delivered, as per demand,
to make your projects easy to implement at a profit.
We do the damn hard engineering to deliver your projects
at a profit.
We perform difficult engineering with the precision
required to professionally implement profitable projects.
Professional engineers and scientists delivering hard
results creatively to meet your project requirements
at a profit.
Awkard ..... maybe
We do professional engineering creatively in collaboration
with you and your customer requirements to deliver results.
or
We professionally engineer via creative collaboration
with your requirements to guarantee benefits accrue
appropriately to all stakeholders.
Sorry Scott, I have deviated into a generic consulting
mission. If you have specific goals or objectives or
markets some further information would be helpful in
imagining powerful ways to describe what your firm, team,
or venture intends to accomplish for your customer with
efficiency and integrity.
I shall note down for our site requirements a tutorial
on how to use killfile technologies appropriately. This
will probably help the self sorting of winners from losers.
Both you and alleged Jim have implicitly suggested
that this might be a useful bit of information for our
venture teams, investors, customers, etc.
To each rat his own cat avoidance techniques.
Regards,
Mike Irwin
P.S. Howabout stopping by the Fractal Food Bank Agent
subthread and commenting on the proposed rule set? Considering
your long standing dialogue with Mook that would really
beg his attention were you to be encroaching into his
area of interests such as complex systems design and
organization implementation. I could really use his
assistance on this. He did after all spot the problem with
the potential use of buzzwords in my mission statement a few
weeks ago. Perhaps he has further useful insight and is even
willing to share it with fellow travelers.
Derek Lyons
Yah. Mission statements are cool, but useless, fluff.
D.
------------------------------
Proprietor, Interim Books http://www.interimbooks.com
USS Henry L. Stimson homepage http://www.interimbooks.com/derek/655/
Derek on Books http://www.interimbooks.com/derek/books/
------------------------------
rk
< snip >
> Yah. Mission statements are cool, but useless, fluff.
I agree, for the most part, useless fluff.
But at day job I decided to write a mission statement as I determined
that it wasn't 100% useless fluff.
I headed up a Task Force and part of the recommendations was to
establish a new group. The report was around 6 or 7 pages, background,
findings, recommendations plus a few more pages of appendices with
statements by Task Force members. Now, the intial version didn't have a
mission statement for the new group. I decided to add that in at the
end of report preparation as it will facilitate communication. Not
because one is supposed to have a mission statement. But it will aid
the executives who will have to approve/deny new structure quickly get a
good grip on it - it was a technical report and the top administrators
are not established in the field. It was written to be readable by both
the technically fluent and management and was largely successful in that
regard.
So, I worked quite hard on getting the recommendation down to a single
sentence that effectively communicates what is intended. That actually
took a lot of work. I think it'll be worth it. At least I hope so.
Michael R. Irwin
Derek Lyons wrote:
>
> Scott Lowther <lex...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >Michael R. Irwin wrote:
> >>
> >> Sorry all,
> >>
> >> This mission statement post apparently did not go out
> >> as I thought yesterday.
> >>
> >> Draft Mission Statement possibilities
> >> for "Space Venture Incubator".com (real name
> >> confidential at this time until registered):
> >
> >How about:
> >"We're really too damned busy doing science and hard engineering to
> >think up mission statements."
>
> Yah. Mission statements are cool, but useless, fluff.
>
I guess it depends upon whether one intends to build an organization,
a set of tools, join a company going the same direction, or some
other activity useful in accomplishing the mission statement.
I have asked this august body to share opinions with me regarding
what a web site business useful in establishing a commercial
space industry; from the original post:
> I have some of my own opinions as regular
> readers have probably noticed but I and
> my investment team are intensely interested
> in what this groups readers think would be
> an appropriate set of goals, objectives,
> policys, methods, techniques, services,
> trinket lines, etc. for the site to interest
> space activists in becoming self training
> space entrepreneurs and billionaires.
I will share with you and the other readers that human
organizations are inherently anarchistic until some
organizing principles are brought to bear.
An engineering organization that cannot make up its
mind whether it produces submarines, warp drives,
basic science, or Mars settlements or venus terraforming
is unlikely to accomplish any of the above on a minimum
path. Given enough time and budget it might accomplish
all of them when someone shows up with sufficient biase
to focus the organization's talents on one milestone
long enough to accomplish it.
One last hint: Investigation of billionaires of the
twentieth century will find them at the head of few
organizations that had a mission statement of "Make
the boss and owners billions of dollars." The return
on investment is usually an emergent characteristic that
is managed for but cannot be elevated to primary importance.
Why? Because the people this would motivate are already
busy making their own billions, not designing spacecraft
to make billions for the boss or owners.
Why not take a chance Derek? Clearly you do not wish
to waste time developing a mission statement for your
book store. Why not take me up on my idiotic offer and
start a subthread here regarding the mission of your book
store, policies, objectives, target market, etc. and see
if we can provide you with some useful ideas to expand
sales (hopefully to space neophytes) in the coming year?
Perhaps there is another venture gleam in your eye, we could
work on a mission statement for this soon to exist organization
and see if it attracts interest, resources, markets, ideas,
investors, customers, etc.
Regards,
Mike Irwin
Michael R. Irwin
The following quote is from sci.space.tech
A jobs board or database might be a traffic
generating service or even a possible revenue
source while providing a valuable service to
the space community. Apparently existing
job boards are insufficiently specialized
to Aerospace to be of maximum usefulness for
some.
> Early results are in, and between public and private responses
> I have results that basically break down as 8:6 in favor of allowing
> at least some job postings. A slight majority are in favor but a
> significant minority (over 40%) are opposed. I tend to feel that
> unless an overwhelming majority of the group are in favor that it
> shouldn't happen.
>
> Some interesting suggestions such as a seperate space jobs newsgroup,
> mailing list, or website have come up. On the website front, we already
> have a jobs section of space.com which points to dice.com (and is not
> particularly specialized in aerospace jobs in particular), and the
> website spacejobs.com, that I know of. Both of these are commercial
> entities and I'm not sure what sort of relationship would be appropriate
> between a public newsgroup and a commercial website. Creating a new
> free website is not a task I am personally interested in, but would
> support if someone else were interested.
>
> Further comments and ideas in this thread are still welcome, both email
> and postings (and a bunch of posted comments are going out today).
>
>
> -george william herbert
> Moderator, sci.space.tech & sci.space.science
> Moderator pro tem, sci.military.moderated
> gher...@retro.com
>
>
Regards,
Mike Irwin
Michael R. Irwin
A suggested augmentation has been forwarded
for our comment and markup. The originator
did not say how he became aware of the proposal.
In the U.S. add a large box for deposit cans/bottles.
The box should be split with a diamond divider
and clearly labeled with the center cavity being
for local cans/bottles while the points of the
compass cavities are used for out of state
deposit cans and bottles.
The Fractal Food Bank Agents can use the
local deposits to prime the capillary system
conveniently when they go to the grocery
store for their own shopping.
When rendezvous occurs with other Fractal
Food Bank Agents, shift the cans and bottles
in the compass points appropriately while
double checking thier direction to send
out of state cans and bottles donated in
Oregon on their merry way in the proper
direction.
Another benefit:
This gives people ways to participate in
the food bank program at no cost to
themselves while cleaning up part of the
substantial litter problem that a consumer
society produces.
A little pride goes a long ways. If a
homeless individual can contribute 6 or
8 out of state cans in exchange for a
can of chili and feel they have contributed
a bit to their own survival, large dividends
may accrue in the future.
If a child in poverty is looking for ways
to increase self esteem, donating out of
state cans to the "needy" while earning
the couple dollars off of instate cans to
get started producing quasar quenchers
(plans downloaded from public library) for
profit might be the ticket.
A society creates creators of wealth and
does as it pleases fairly with the economic surplus,
or it does not. Four horsemen are not uncommon
visitors in societies that choose poorly.
Regards,
Mike Irwin
P.S. We may need to establish different levels
of Free Agents with a couple of standard label
symbols.
Some may wish to participate in different sections
of the program as they deem appropriate.
Derek Lyons
>So, I worked quite hard on getting the recommendation down to a single
>sentence that effectively communicates what is intended. That actually
>took a lot of work. I think it'll be worth it. At least I hope so.
It sounds more like what you wrote is an abstract, that is a handle
intended to entice one to study the larger verbiage its attached to.
(Sadly abstracts tend to become sound bites and regarded as entities
in their own right.)
Mission statements on the other hand are placebos intended to be
swallowed whole.
Michael R. Irwin
<snip spoofer response to alleged Jim>
Constructive input from Jim provided elsewhere
to non nobodies. Take note alleged Jim, perhaps
you can better emulate Jim next time.
> Subject:
> Re: Moderator Survey: Job Advertisements
> Date:
> Thu, 07 Dec 2000 02:14:54 GMT
> From:
> j...@spacedev.com (Jim Benson)
> Organization:
> SpaceDev
> Newsgroups:
> sci.space.tech, sci.space.science
> References:
> 1
>
>
>
>
> On 5 Dec 2000 23:27:46 -0800, gher...@gw.retro.com (George William
> Herbert) was forced by men in trench coats to say:
>
> >I've been getting a fair number of job advertisements in the
> >last few weeks, noticably many more than previously in the
> >groups, and as there really hasn't been a strong formal policy
> >in place previously I wanted to ask the groups for input prior
> >to making one.
> >
> >So... what do you think of the idea of allowing job ads in the
> >newsgroups sci.space.tech and/or sci.space.science? How strictly
>
> George, et al,
>
> SpaceDev almost always has job openings for space-related system
> engineers, mechanical engineers, EEs, real time software people, etc.
> We are up to about 25 total full-time employees now, and seem to be
> adding new people slow and steady.
>
> Being a small company we cannot afford to pay the huge, and usually
> immediate, fee required by head hunter agencies, so we are always
> looking for affordable means of finding experienced and enthusiastic
> new team members. We have job listings on our web site and are
> starting to use some of the more popular .com job sites, but that is
> still an experiment.
>
> I have mixed feelings about posting ads here, but given not that this
> is a moderated group, the big plus is that it is moderated by you! :-)
> This could be important because value judgments would need to be made
> on each and every ad, and that requires experience, knowledge and good
> sense, all of which you have. However, once it is started, it might be
> hard to stop, especially if someone less qualified eventually came to
> moderate the group.
>
> Bottom line: I would like to see it allowed as an experiment, for a
> limited time, and with very clear guidelines.
>
> Best,
>
> Jim Benson
> SpaceDev
> wwww.spacedev.com
>
>
>
Regards,
Mike Irwin
Michael R. Irwin
Do you have a suggested alternate mechanism for communicating
between all stakeholders in an enterprise what the intent
of the organizations activities are?
An example: Some people do not like to work on weapons of
mass destruction. Do you feel it appropriate that their
work be used in such a way without their knowledge?
How would you go about building some consensus in an
organization as to what the organization's common goals
are?
Regards,
Mike Irwin
Michael R. Irwin
"Michael R. Irwin" wrote:
>
> <snip spoofer response to alleged Jim>
>
< snip constructive input from Jim presented elsewhere>
Another related opinion on the same requirement:
> There have been a lot of good arguments presented. I'll preface by
> saying that I'm in the defense industry (DC area) and from time to time
> I've been looking to get into space exploration/exploitation/propulsion,
> etc. [I'm getting really tired of defense work, particularly in the
> sys. engineering/technology assessment type of arena, where you don't
> actually get to do real work, i.e. physics, very often.] It would be
> very useful to me to see the occasional job ad come across this group.
>
> But... I completely agree with RK's strictures re: format, content, who
> posts, etc.
>
> OTOH, if it will overload the moderator, then I say no.
>
> As far as other resources out there, I've searched them from time to
> time and found them simply not populated with enough openings in areas
> of interest.
>
> Note to anyone wanting to do this... We need to get more true space
> advocates into the space industry (as opposed to the guys who simply see
> it as an interesting way to feed off the taxpayers). Many folks not in
> the space industry already, but who might be qualified, don't have the
> 'rolodex' to properly network and get the job they want. There really
> needs to be a "space fanatics' job exchange" website or something so we
> can get a higher fraction of the interested and innovative folks
> actually involved.
>
> (OK, I'll step down from the soapbox now...)
>
> - Eric.
Regards,
Mike Irwin
rk
> >So, I worked quite hard on getting the recommendation down to a single
> >sentence that effectively communicates what is intended. That actually
> >took a lot of work. I think it'll be worth it. At least I hope so.
>
> It sounds more like what you wrote is an abstract, that is a handle
> intended to entice one to study the larger verbiage its attached to.
Yes. The document is written in short sections, mostly 1 page or less
per section. Reviewing it, I realized that different people read things
in different ways and it would be beneficial to capture the essence of
the recommendations in a short section; one or two sentences. Then,
they could use that as a basis for reading the rest of the doc. Others
like to see things presented differently; here's the background; here's
the problem; here are some conclusions; and here are some
recommendations.
It is not a traditional mission statement [which make me wanna puke].
> (Sadly abstracts tend to become sound bites and regarded as entities
> in their own right.)
Yes, you are correct. That's why I, and the review team, spent quite a
bit of time on one little sentence. It will be of importance, I feel,
to a non-negligible number of the target audience.
> Mission statements on the other hand are placebos intended to be
> swallowed whole.
We will be an entity committed to the achievement of excellence in all
that we do. We will ensure that our customer's goals are met or
exceeded while meeting all of our budget and schedule. We will be a
responsive, adaptable organization reflecting that to which we strive to
do.
<rk barfs>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
rk The Soviets no longer were a threat
stellar engineering, ltd. in space, and in the terms that
stel...@erols.com.NOSPAM became commonplace among the veteran
Hi-Rel Digital Systems Design ground crews, as well as the
astronauts, the dreamers and builders
were replaced by a new wave of NASA teams, bureaucrats who swayed with
the political winds, sadly short of dreams, drive, and determination
to keep forging outward beyond earth. -- Shepard and Slayton.
Derek Lyons
>Do you have a suggested alternate mechanism for communicating
>between all stakeholders in an enterprise what the intent
>of the organizations activities are?
Sure. A business plan. As rk stated, a useable mission statement
flows from that plan, not the reverse.
>An example: Some people do not like to work on weapons of
>mass destruction. Do you feel it appropriate that their
>work be used in such a way without their knowledge?
Which has nothing to do with anything at hand.
>How would you go about building some consensus in an
>organization as to what the organization's common goals
>are?
Who cares what the consensus of the organization is? Them what has
the gold makes the rules. In the case of a distributed organization
like you seem to plan, they sign on or not depending on the goals you
set. Anything else is self defeating madness.
Derek L.
Michael R. Irwin
Derek Lyons wrote:
>
> "Michael R. Irwin" <mir...@harborside.com> wrote:
> >Do you have a suggested alternate mechanism for communicating
> >between all stakeholders in an enterprise what the intent
> >of the organizations activities are?
>
> Sure. A business plan. As rk stated, a useable mission statement
> flows from that plan, not the reverse.
Good point. Many business plans are drafted or revised
after some market analyis or needs assessment have been
conducted.
Do you have any opinions regarding services that are not
currently available to space related businesses that could be
provided by a web site would be useful and potentially indispensable?
The indispensability is desirable so that site traffic is steady
and assured.
<snip>
>
> >How would you go about building some consensus in an
> >organization as to what the organization's common goals
> >are?
>
> Who cares what the consensus of the organization is? Them what has
> the gold makes the rules. In the case of a distributed organization
> like you seem to plan, they sign on or not depending on the goals you
> set. Anything else is self defeating madness.
With U.S. unemployment rates at extreme lows and technically
trained or qualified people rare compared to demand it is
desirable to get some buyin from employees. Otherwise they
tend to move on.
Many modern economic practices revolve around small teams
communicating with specialized market niches. A methodology
that seems to work rather well at getting buyin is to encourage
the teams to set self determined goals intended to meet
perceived market requirements.
Presumably the teams know the markets better than top
level planners. This knowledge is often developed by
talking to the market. This can be tricky if no market
is in existence and must be created from scratch.
Should my venture team coalesce around a common set of
goals I will point out to them that you agree with me
that effective business planning is required to finalize
high quality goals and mission statements.
Thanks for your comments! I assure you that
we will do serious business plan drafting shortly.
We are still trying to identify a niche and firm up
an appropriate business model.
Some of my aquaintenances are rather sharp and my initial
concept of traffic and trinkets does need to be expanded a
bit to attract their serious interest and attention.
Thanks Again!
Mike Irwin
rk
> >Do you have a suggested alternate mechanism for communicating
> >between all stakeholders in an enterprise what the intent
> >of the organizations activities are?
>
> Sure. A business plan. As rk stated, a useable mission statement
> flows from that plan, not the reverse.
In my own defense, the "mission statement" was not called a mission
statement by an "objective." That is, summarizing, in one to two
sentences, what the organization would do. Why? As discussed, some
people like to skim things, get a good feel for where it's heading and
get a concept in mind, and then read more carefully, in greater detail.
Also, if people discuss it with someone else, if an explanation of what
you're trying to do takes a page of talking, you have a serious problem.
-----------------------------------------
> >How would you go about building some consensus in an
> >organization as to what the organization's common goals
> >are?
>
> Who cares what the consensus of the organization is? Them what has
> the gold makes the rules. In the case of a distributed organization
> like you seem to plan, they sign on or not depending on the goals you
> set. Anything else is self defeating madness.
For me, I am attempting to establish a small group inside a large
aerospace group (day job). This can be handled, as I see it, in two
ways:
1. Have meetings and have the goals come out as a
result of these meetings and something that
everyone can agree on.
2. Have one or two people set the goals and then
have them with the gold agree to them.
Number 1 above is the reason why there needs to be a small group set up
as a more or less independent Institute (mammal).
Number 2 above will result in nothing new (dinosaur).
I agree with your analysis of a distributed organization, unless one
wishes to have some randomness thrown in; sometimes that could lead to
new things, too, although that's not really a plan, more of what I call
"the shotgun approach." You can hit things with a shot gun, fired
randomly, enough times. Indeed, if you get enough shotguns and have
enough shells you will bring something down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
rk How the hell do I know? I'm just a
stellar engineering, ltd. common, ordinary, simple savior of
stel...@erols.com.NOSPAM America's destiny.
Hi-Rel Digital Systems Design -- Pat Paulsen
Michael R. Irwin
rk wrote:
>
> Derek Lyons wrote:
>
<snip business plan discussion>
I will attempt to summarize you and Derek's combined 10 cents as:
If the web site venture intends to accomplish anything via self
organizing
chaotic elements then there needs to be plenty of traffic, plenty
of partipation, and plenty of resource teams (shotguns) applied
to plenty of self selected percieved problems.
After trinket sales are in progress to the traffic flow, some
resources should be re-invested in increasing the site's utility
in increasing the accuracy of the shotgun aiming mechanisms.
Hopefully this will encourage successful shotguns to continue
using the site while targeting new problems.
Thanks for the input!
Mike Irwin
Michael R. Irwin
"Michael R. Irwin" wrote:
>
> <snip Draft program guidelines and explanation>
>
Another semi-anonymous suggestion:
Assume that open engineering designs are available
for small partime startups which utilize common
food containters in the U.S. such as:
Plastic pepsi bottles
Plastic Folgers Coffee Jars
wax paper coke cups
specific Plastic jar lids
Such a cottage industry can easily purchase rinsed
scrap from local neighborhood service clubs or school
fund drives.
As success leads to expansion a problem is created
in getting sufficient material to sustain growing
demand for product.
As 2nd order behavior a facilitating organization
coordinating with Fractal Food Bank Agents could
create a business registry and double entry transaction
system to enable the volunteer capillary structure to
deliver appropriate recycled feedstock to the industrial
locations for a prenegotiated price. The cash generated
can then be invested in appropriate food to inject into
the capillary system or for delivery to appropriate organ
sites or it could be invested in reducing the operational
costs of the capillary network without any appearance
of impropiety on the part of the Free Agents.
This could be done by providing better tools to enhance
the capillaries or by providing feul occasionally to
defry operating costs.
An interesting note:
Extensive records must be kept regarding employer provided
vehicles to employees so that appropriate taxes may be
paid on any "personal" mileage benefit.
Since the Fractal Food Bank Agent's vehicle is on duty
at all times, no detailed records would be necessary
nor could feul provided via a local feul account be
considered "income". One hundred percent of the feul
used in the pickup is applicable to operating as a roving
food deliverer and collector as long as the sign and box
are in operation.
How individual do gooders acting as Free Agents would
feel about this slight benefit while doing their good
deeds would obviously have to be discussed and the approach
identified above tailored to keep the majority of the
Free Agents happy. Without a large established and interlinked
base of pickups in service the capillary system would collapse
and be of no practical use.
Note that this system has the potential to address a
primal fear of manufacturing executives when it comes
to depending on recycled materials as feedstock. A
reliable consistent supply.
Obviously there are only so many Jars of Folgers sold
in a given rural area. With a system in place to deliver
hundreds or thousands or millions of Folgiers Jars to the
factory location for a prenegotiated price; it becomes
possible to design a component around a process using
the specified feedstock appropriately to maximize overal
manufacturing profits.
Regards,
Mike Irwin
Michael R. Irwin
Julian Treadwell wrote:
>
> > Ok, off the top of my head:
>
> Goals and objectives: 1- the creation of self-sustaining, autonomous
> communities in space habitats and on the Moon, Mars and possibly other
> planetary bodies; 2 - the establishment of profitable industries that
> would exploit the mineral, tourism and scientific potential of non-Earth
> environments.
Excellent! These are similiar to goals and objectives that
I also hold.
Perhaps as Mr. McWilliams has pointed out elsewhere we should
consider prototyping here on Earth to develop the procedures,
knowledge, oganizational skills, technology, etc. necessary to
implement a successful program.
In software engineering there is a concept called
Fan Out as a large problem is broken into a top down hiearchy
of possible sub modules or subroutines to meet system requirements.
Fan In is a related concept that takes place at the bottom of
an extensive pyramid of broken out tasks. It basically identifies
redundant componets and replaces them all with a common generic
software component that can be used by by the components above
it. An easy example would be: A print routine that is called
the Windows system by all applications that are Windows compliant.
Another example would a linux portable plugged into a spacecraft
bus for all non time critical processing requires of a spacecraft
during assembly testing and flight operations.
The end result is a diamond shaped hiearchy. In a complex system
overlapping diamonds can result in feedback problems and unanticipated
system behavior in untested configurations.
Another set of concepts is top down planning and bottom up
optimization.
Top down planning starts in the ivory tower and assumes extremely
knowledgeable people know enough about the problem being addressed
to accurately allocate tasks and associated efforts necessary to
successfully complete these tasks. If used exclusively on software
project it rarely works well.
Bottom up optimization usually refers to specialized programming
at the component level using detailed knowledge of system and
component characters along with field application knowledge to
greatly improve performance of the specific tasks which have a
large impact on the system performance.
An example would be a realtime display system programmed in
basic on a commodore 128 using a top down methodology which
is then optimized by decompiling the runtime exec and replacing
it with assembly code fast enough and determine to guarantee
response to the locally implemented RS-232 protocols in service.
Some newer ideas in softare engineering include rapid prototyping
and development environments or frameworks. Basically these can
be viewed as enabling an application to simulated as pieces are
implemented and integrated into the framework. When all functionality
is implemented at adequate performance the softare engineer's job
is done.
I propose that we apply some of these concepts of software engineering
at the macroscopic small business level to begin prototyping of the
technologies and techniques we need to accomplish the goals and
objectives specified above along with perhaps a few more.
Assuming that you are stranded in tin buck two and can no one of
similar interest in the piece of the action you wish to attack:
What kind of web site would allow you to gather knowledge regarding
your area of interest while allowing you to assist others and network
with potential venture partners?
Once a tentative venture team has coalesced around an idea what
kind of tools would be useful in implementing it a profit on an
initial partime basis?
Assuming sufficient success is achieved to generate cashflow for
a few fulltime employees or investment from a Venture Capitalist
to further develop the enterprise, what kinds of follow on services
would be useful to small breakeven ventures attempting to develop
into large nimble profitable enterprises?
>
> Policies: 1 - no 'land-grab'; 2 - a U.N.-mandated 'space law', similar
> to the laws governing international waters; 3 - no nuclear weapons in
> space.
These policies have not worked well to date. While our venture will
not be directly involved in politics we will probably have some policy
discussions to attempt to develop positions that lobby groups can
pursue which are beneficial to our traffic. You and your ideas will
welcome in those discussions and we will probably post notice of the
discussions and result here on sci.space.policy.
>
> Methods and techniques: see Gerard O'Neill's text "The High Frontier".
> His ideas were probably practical in the 70's when he wrote the
> book,they certainly would be now.
A lot of work is being done at the top end of policy planning
and multi-billion dollar proposals. Our site intends to tackle
the problem from the other end and develop some successful
entrepreneurs and ventures capable of contributing to grandiose
plans and ventures in meaningful ways in the near future.
>
> Services: tourist flights to orbital space stations and later the Moon
> etc; burials in space; geological surveys
>
> Trinket lines: moonrock, space dust
Excellent ideas. I will get them presented to our site
traffickers as soon as possible for their consideration,
markup, and possible implementation.
While many of these ideas do not seem near term feasible
for small ventures, derivative products are possible.
For example: Burial in space.
An artistic firm could design an appropriate space themed
urn for machining in an appropriate space age metal or
molding out of durable recycled plastic where the family
could store a customer's ashes until the burial trust
could afford the launch fees into space. This would
also provide an opportunity for a registry to begin
tracking existing demand, aperiodic launch services might
be arranged as built up demand justified them.
Although tourism seems a ways off, several firms are
in existence that plan to telemeter lunar experiences
or Martian experiences in some form.
See Bill Palmer's postings regarding Mars for another
variation of this approach.
Thanks again for your assistance!
Mike Irwin
Michael R. Irwin
I found a site that apparently functions
as a clearing house to put online
technical free lancers in touch with
potential clients and project owners.
It may function as a linked resource
or provide some functionality worth
copying and competing with for aerospace
specific projects.
It looks similar to sourceXchange.com
and sourceforge.com in its overall structure
and presentation.
Regards,
Mike Irwin
> Subject:
> Re: Cooperate with Russian technical experts
> Date:
> 18 Nov 2000 23:33:35 GMT
> From:
> vp...@columbia.edu
> Organization:
> NewsOne.Net - Free Usenet News via the Web - http://newsone.net/
> Newsgroups:
> sci.engr.analysis
> Followup-To:
> sci.engr.analysis
> References:
> 1
>
>
>
>
> I had tried to set up a system to handle such cooperation
> a decade ago. I failed. But elance.com succeeded recently.
> se...@elance.com is the person to contact. I met him at NYC MSG
> when he recently had an e-biz booth. Actually such a system should be
> great for all engineers everywhere who wish to work alone and
> remotely.
>
>
>
> In article <8ti356$72k$2...@boss.nc.orc.ru>, aazar <aa...@orc.ru> writes:
> >A group of qualified scientists and engineers in
> >Moscow are ready to carry out research and technical work of any
> >complexity.
> >We are experienced in the areas of structural mechanics of
> >lifting cranes, building and road making machinery and other similar
> >equipment. We can design, model (simulate), analyze and
> >calculate new and traditional structures. If necessary the outlined field of
> >activity may be extended as in Moscow we can find experts of any kind.
> >We have full CAD design and drawing facilities and can link up with your
> >experts using industry standard software and E-mail.
> >The rate of payment for scientific and technical works in Russia is
> >twice as less of payment for similar
> > work in USA. We are seeking companies who are
> >interested in working with us. Send any questions by E-mail to
> >aa...@orc.ru. We look forward to hearing from
> >you and for an opportunity to work together.
> >Regards
Derek Lyons
>Derek Lyons wrote:
>> "Michael R. Irwin" <mir...@harborside.com> wrote:
>>>How would you go about building some consensus in an
>>>organization as to what the organization's common goals
>>>are?
>>
>> Who cares what the consensus of the organization is? Them what has
>> the gold makes the rules. In the case of a distributed organization
>> like you seem to plan, they sign on or not depending on the goals you
>> set. Anything else is self defeating madness.
>
>With U.S. unemployment rates at extreme lows and technically
>trained or qualified people rare compared to demand it is
>desirable to get some buyin from employees. Otherwise they
>tend to move on.
Some buyin is fine. But you don't run a significant business by
consensus, nor will investors find it very amusing. The employee buys
in when he joins the organization. You don't gather a random bunch
and then find what they will all buy into.
>Many modern economic practices revolve around small teams
>communicating with specialized market niches. A methodology
>that seems to work rather well at getting buyin is to encourage
>the teams to set self determined goals intended to meet
>perceived market requirements.
But the teams work within a larger general goal set by the parent
company. A computer company may build a cool new DVD gadget, but a
machinery company probably won't. Hence my statement above about
employees beginning the buyin process by hiring on.
>Presumably the teams know the markets better than top
>level planners. This knowledge is often developed by
>talking to the market.
Fine for niches, not so likely for broader segments. (IMHO)
D.
Michael R. Irwin
Derek Lyons wrote:
>
> "Michael R. Irwin" <mir...@harborside.com> wrote:
> >Derek Lyons wrote:
> >> "Michael R. Irwin" <mir...@harborside.com> wrote:
> >>>How would you go about building some consensus in an
> >>>organization as to what the organization's common goals
> >>>are?
> >>
> >> Who cares what the consensus of the organization is? Them what has
> >> the gold makes the rules. In the case of a distributed organization
> >> like you seem to plan, they sign on or not depending on the goals you
> >> set. Anything else is self defeating madness.
> >
> >With U.S. unemployment rates at extreme lows and technically
> >trained or qualified people rare compared to demand it is
> >desirable to get some buyin from employees. Otherwise they
> >tend to move on.
>
> Some buyin is fine. But you don't run a significant business by
> consensus, nor will investors find it very amusing. The employee buys
> in when he joins the organization. You don't gather a random bunch
> and then find what they will all buy into.
I think you are playing semantics games with me Derek.
Some buyin is not fine with challenging projects.
Significant business does not operate well without consensus.
Whether consensus is established by dictate from the top or
by coordination between knowledgeable points within the company
and its markets has significance.
If employees automatically bought in when joining an organization
managers and hiearchies would be unnecessary.
Has someone gathered a random bunch?
RESET SARCASM
Ok, assuming you are providing me with constructive
input instead of being obstructionistic or amusing
yourself with verbal darts:
I find I agree, you are absolutely correct. A key
feature set that we need to assess are mechanisms to
assist people interested in joining space startup ventures
on a partime low risk basis to find "buddies" to associate
with profitably. Hopefully these mechanisms would
accelerate the incidence of space venture startups and
"create" our market.
What would be required or useful in gathering a bunch
of "random" people who wish to settle space or see
space settled and then help them coalesce into diverse
effective ventures. Remember that in a space economy
we need damn near all products and services available
on Earth plus some new ones. Obviously some of the
existing products must be modified and improved for the
space environment.
Notice that these ventures immediately start to become
each others customers and suppliers. If large sells
and cashflows are not possible at the start, information
flow certainly is. For example: If one venture wants
to start suborbital tourist hops when cheap hoppers
become available. They can begin providing information
to spacecraft designers while collecting information from
potential tourists while assembling their venture and
practicing their business skills by developing and marketing
trinkets.
One incentive to casual site visitors interested in space
that we have discussed providing is some running "grubstake"
speadsheets showing the antipicated cost of various types
of going to the Moon or Mars as tourists, employees,
subcontractors, emmigrants, etc. A specific objective of
the site could be to assist low cash startups with qualified
manpower in exchange for options that might finance a space
enthusiast's tour of a Lunar Colony in 30 years or early
retirement. Only risk would be the time expended participating
and the experience itself might be worth that if tasks are
selected and structured properly.
You are absolutely correct. A key to success for the
envisioned web site startup will be the ability to
encourage small group formation and facilitate effective
interaction between groups.
>
> >Many modern economic practices revolve around small teams
> >communicating with specialized market niches. A methodology
> >that seems to work rather well at getting buyin is to encourage
> >the teams to set self determined goals intended to meet
> >perceived market requirements.
>
> But the teams work within a larger general goal set by the parent
> company.
True. This often, but not always, is called a "mission statement".
A computer company may build a cool new DVD gadget, but a
> machinery company probably won't. Hence my statement above about
> employees beginning the buyin process by hiring on.
I agree the initial employment offer begins the buyin
process in a healthy company. I have seen many professionals
join firms with fuzzy purposes and move on quickly. It is
an expensive process for both parties when errors are made
but they are not uncommon.
>
> >Presumably the teams know the markets better than top
> >level planners. This knowledge is often developed by
> >talking to the market.
>
> Fine for niches, not so likely for broader segments. (IMHO)
I would assume an executive team at a large firm better
know the broader market segments pretty well or the firm
is in large trouble. Obviously a team or group must act
within its scope. Just as obviously (from history, ISS,
Apollo, RLV startups) a large hiearchy or business ecology
is required to support expensive space frontiers.
A consortium of multiple teams or successful ventures moving
upscale will obviously have to structure their executive
steering committee or select a PM carefully to maximize
their chances of success and profit. This might actually
be done by capitalizing an integrating authority such as
an RLV startup. Considering the difficulties in raising
cash, perhaps next generation RLVs will consider working
with their suppliers and customers to keep cash capital costs
down while getting some payloads lined up and waiting for
success.
A RLV startup with twenty payloads, 2 completed and waiting,
5 funded for launch, and 13 in various stages of development
might find venture capital a bit easier to attract than
one hoping to peel off some of the existing markets.
Especially if the companies with payloads in development
come up with some net profits while building payloads.
Regards,
Mike Irwin
rk
>
> rk wrote:
> >
> > Derek Lyons wrote:
> >
> <snip business plan discussion>
> >
> > > >How would you go about building some consensus in an
> > > >organization as to what the organization's common goals
> > > >are?
> > >
> > > Who cares what the consensus of the organization is? Them what has
> > > the gold makes the rules. In the case of a distributed organization
> > > like you seem to plan, they sign on or not depending on the goals you
> > > set. Anything else is self defeating madness.
> >
> > For me, I am attempting to establish a small group inside a large
> > aerospace group (day job). This can be handled, as I see it, in two
> > ways:
> >
> > 1. Have meetings and have the goals come out as a
> > result of these meetings and something that
> > everyone can agree on.
> >
> > 2. Have one or two people set the goals and then
> > have them with the gold agree to them.
> >
> > Number 1 above is the reason why there needs to be a small group set up
> > as a more or less independent Institute (mammal).
> >
> > Number 2 above will result in nothing new (dinosaur).
Oops, my writing got a bit discombobulated.
1 ==> Reason for new group
1 ==> Will result in nothing new (dinosaur)
2 ==> Use *leadership* to create a new group (mammal)
2 ==> Dinosaurs will try to crush and kill mammal (and
usually succeed)
Sorry.
> > I agree with your analysis of a distributed organization, unless one
> > wishes to have some randomness thrown in; sometimes that could lead to
> > new things, too, although that's not really a plan, more of what I call
> > "the shotgun approach." You can hit things with a shot gun, fired
> > randomly, enough times. Indeed, if you get enough shotguns and have
> > enough shells you will bring something down.
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > rk How the hell do I know? I'm just a
> > stellar engineering, ltd. common, ordinary, simple savior of
> > stel...@erols.com.NOSPAM America's destiny.
> > Hi-Rel Digital Systems Design -- Pat Paulsen
>
> I will attempt to summarize you and Derek's combined 10 cents as:
>
> If the web site venture intends to accomplish anything via self organizing
> chaotic elements then there needs to be plenty of traffic, plenty
> of partipation, and plenty of resource teams (shotguns) applied
> to plenty of self selected percieved problems.
>
> After trinket sales are in progress to the traffic flow, some
> resources should be re-invested in increasing the site's utility
> in increasing the accuracy of the shotgun aiming mechanisms.
> Hopefully this will encourage successful shotguns to continue
> using the site while targeting new problems.
Yes, for it to work, it needs to be adaptive. Of course, that's the way
most things are in real life. Think of the people you work projects
with. The losers who just hang on, drag you down, and contribute
nothing? Or do you try to re-group with the people with whom you've
worked well before?
You may be able to get started using the shotgun approach. Then, you
might see what falls down, see if you like it, and then decide to
actually target that species with people with a good record of hitting
what they aim for. A bit haphazard, but possible.
One boss that I had in the past [and the best one - and I know his new
boss reads this group] used to just hire really good people when he saw
them - even if he didn't have anything particular for them at the time.
He even referred to them as "sharpshooters." They didn't miss and
either found their own targets or targets appeared and were dealt with.
rk
> >Presumably the teams know the markets better than top
> >level planners. This knowledge is often developed by
> >talking to the market.
>
> Fine for niches, not so likely for broader segments. (IMHO)
I note that Pet Rocks were big business in the '70s.
Markets for new products are often created, not polled.
Marketeers often miss the boat by a mile (ok, km).
Many times engineers miss the boat by a km (they usually do use
metric). In the software world, for example, most "serious" programmers
use UNIX. And their ideal system is UNIX, or UNIX-like. The market for
computers, however, can't stand UNIX, for the most part. To much of a
PITA.
No great conclusions,
Just that talking to the market doesn't always work nor does relying on
engineers to know the market.
just some babble,
rk
P.S. Would Rotary <or whomever> have gotten more investors if they
treated their prototype like a prototype car? Fancy shows? Young gals
in bikinis leaning on a landing leg posing for pictures? For those that
followed it more closely, was it portrayed as an engineering development
or a Pet Rock or a can of soda?
Derek Lyons
think more about what the buzzwords *mean*, and the processes behind
them.
Derek Lyons
>Derek Lyons wrote:
>>
>> But the teams work within a larger general goal set by the parent
>> company.
>
>True. This often, but not always, is called a "mission statement".
>
Often, but it can get fuzzy. 'Mission statements' are generally more
philosophical in nature. 'Goals' are planning targets. There is an
enormous amount of difference between the two. (Yes, this seems to be
semantics, but semantics are *important*.)
I think the difference can be summarized easily; PR and Marketing
departments read mission statements. Investors study goals.
F'rinstance, the missions statement for my bookstore might read
something like 'Provide maximum value and service for the readers and
collectors of Kitsap County'. A goal would be 'Maintain the Conning
Tower website and add 100 links to the link website', or 'Expand the
Literary Fiction section by 35%'.
Michael R. Irwin
Derek Lyons wrote:
>
> "Michael R. Irwin" <mir...@harborside.com> wrote:
> >Derek Lyons wrote:
> >>
> >> But the teams work within a larger general goal set by the parent
> >> company.
> >
> >True. This often, but not always, is called a "mission statement".
> >
>
> Often, but it can get fuzzy. 'Mission statements' are generally more
> philosophical in nature. 'Goals' are planning targets. There is an
> enormous amount of difference between the two. (Yes, this seems to be
> semantics, but semantics are *important*.)
A larger general goal is singular.
"Goals" as planning targets are presumbably smaller objectives
that fit within the scope the larger general goal.
If my larger goal is to profitably assist with the
formation of venture capital sufficient to settle space,
do you have some suggestions on useful online activities
that may support this larger objective?
>
> I think the difference can be summarized easily; PR and Marketing
> departments read mission statements. Investors study goals.
> F'rinstance, the missions statement for my bookstore might read
> something like 'Provide maximum value and service for the readers and
> collectors of Kitsap County'. A goal would be 'Maintain the Conning
> Tower website and add 100 links to the link website', or 'Expand the
> Literary Fiction section by 35%'.
>
I see your point. Do you have suggestions for techniques
that would help move books off of a web site trafficked by
space enthusiasts, venturers, investers, and/or technical
professionals?
Regards,
Mike Irwin
Michael R. Irwin
To avoid the appearance of potential graft
or corruption as operations grow a double
entry bookkeeping method may be useful.
While this might prototyped via cheap
palmtops it may be useful to examine the
use of portables and wireless technologies.
Idle portables could be contributing processing
cycles to various activities in exchange for
credits of possible use elsewhere.
Open engineering of a solar panel and battery
power supply system suitable for long term road
use globally might be a good market for lunar
or mar vehicle component manufactures.
Wireless technology would potentially extend
capillary action worldwide with the exception
of isolated regions or islands (unless aircraft
and boats become active Free Agents) while
providing market for satellites.
This also makes each Fractal Food Bank Agent a
potential access point for email or messaging
services. This level of service might require
professionals making a living off of various services,
it would be a large time sink for volunteers.
OTOH Some "volunteers" might find funding of gas
expenses and a solar powered wireless portable internet
access equitable compensation for the nuiscance of talking
to their neighbors occassionally. Clearly this is an
advanced phase of operations dependent on previous success
to be prototypable.
Satellites require launch services, design services,
operational services and maintance or replacement.
Alternatively, Clarke and Heinlein style old fashioned
trilateral equatorial manned antenna farms could be
evaluated. Starting from either skylab style cans or
spacehab modules.
Regards,
Mike Irwin
P.S. When I asked what the Red Cross bloodmobile cost
to equip and operate, nobody was quite certain. Guesses
ranged from hundreds of thousands to over a million.
Blood is avialbable from the Red Cross for surgery at
prices (IIRC) ranging somewhere between $60-$100/pints.
Discounts used to be available if arrangements could
be made for donors to designate blood towards a specific
surgical procedure.
I suspect the testing and processing implied in the
per pint price of blood in the USA supports a lot
of medical and laboratory professionals.
Michael R. Irwin
An interesting feedback loop probably
designed to encourage rapid growth.
Details are available at www.topica.com
regarding this approach.
Basically topica provides email list services
similar to egroups.com and others but they
share a portion of the advertising revenue
generated by the list traffic with the list
moderator.
The list moderators are self selected but
there are policies in place for topica's
protection which must be followed. Seems
a fair enough exchange.
Imagine getting paid to yack at your buddies
about how to incorporate a venture. Might
slow down things a bit to figure out excellent
tailored articles of incorporation but sufficient
yacking might help pay the lawyers to file the
paperwork or the state fees on same.
Of course you have to get good at skimming past
the advertising and you may actually by something
on impulse with the resulting negative impact
on personal capital formation.
Still, nothing ventured nothing gained.
Regards,
Mike Irwin
Tom McWilliams
>
> "Michael R. Irwin" <mir...@harborside.com> wrote:
> >Derek Lyons wrote:
> >>
> >> But the teams work within a larger general goal set by the parent
> >> company.
> >
> >True. This often, but not always, is called a "mission statement".
> >
>
> Often, but it can get fuzzy. 'Mission statements' are generally more
> philosophical in nature. 'Goals' are planning targets. There is an
> enormous amount of difference between the two. (Yes, this seems to be
> semantics, but semantics are *important*.)
>
> I think the difference can be summarized easily; PR and Marketing
> departments read mission statements. Investors study goals.
> F'rinstance, the missions statement for my bookstore might read
> something like 'Provide maximum value and service for the readers and
> collectors of Kitsap County'. A goal would be 'Maintain the Conning
> Tower website and add 100 links to the link website', or 'Expand the
> Literary Fiction section by 35%'.
>
> D.
Another way to distinguish them might be that mission statements are
only testable based on intuitive concpetions, wheras goals can be tested
based on sensory perceptions.
Did we provide customer value? Most customers tell us they think so, so
sure, we fulfilled that mission.
Did we add 100 links? Let's dowload the page, and *see* if the goal has
been met.
-Tm
--
* . * '^
,.. " . *
,
' Tommy Mac
rk
> Another way to distinguish them might be that mission statements are
> only testable based on intuitive concpetions, wheras goals can be tested
> based on sensory perceptions.
Too intellectual for me.
I found a site that reminds me of an old program that I wrote once and
is quite applicable to this situation: the mission statement generator:
http://www.bright.net/~flounder/mission.html
Mission Statement:
We exist to dynamically conceptualize
enterprise-wide alignments to allow us to
credibly customize turn-key manufactured
products so that we may appropriately provide
access to high-payoff process improvements
while promoting personal employee growth.
Let's try another:
We assertively build cooperative e-business
and approach our jobs with passion an
commitment.
Tom McWilliams
>
> Tom McWilliams wrote:
>
> > Another way to distinguish them might be that mission statements are
> > based on sensory perceptions.
>
> Too intellectual for me.
Maybe the meta-model description is, but the actual distinction is easy
to apply.
> I found a site that reminds me of an old program that I wrote once and
> is quite applicable to this situation: the mission statement generator:
>
> http://www.bright.net/~flounder/mission.html
Ha ha!! That's a much better version that the one I found:
http://dack.com/web/bullshit.html
Note that they are funny precisely because they fail the 'well-formed
goal' test - there's no way to tell if such mission statements get
fulfilled.
rk
> > > Another way to distinguish them might be that mission statements are
> > > only testable based on intuitive conceptions, whereas goals can be tested
> > > based on sensory perceptions.
> >
> > Too intellectual for me.
>
> Maybe the meta-model description is, but the actual distinction is easy
> to apply.
Glad you understand my educational level: 4th grade. Then why not
describe things in terms us morons can understand, rather than
pseudo-intellectual words and phrases that few others speak? Dumb ol'
me thinks that this is a public forum; of course, I remember what I
think of people who talk like that in a public forum seem to be [and
are].
> > I found a site that reminds me of an old program that I wrote once and
> > is quite applicable to this situation: the mission statement generator:
> >
> > http://www.bright.net/~flounder/mission.html
>
> Ha ha!! That's a much better version that the one I found:
>
> http://dack.com/web/bullshit.html
>
> Note that they are funny precisely because they fail the 'well-formed
> goal' test - there's no way to tell if such mission statements get
> fulfilled.
I thank you for explaining to me why they are funny. I guess I couldn't
have figured it out.
Of course, I thought they were funny, but not for the reasons you told
me I thought they were funny for. They're funny, to me, because they
sound like dribble that comes out of manager's reports after a retreat
with high-paid management consultants. You can think they are funny for
the reasons that you think they are. I think it's perhaps a bit
presumptuous [biggest word I know] for you to tell me why I think the
material I presented is funny.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
rk The key to developing engineering
stellar engineering, ltd. confidence is the rigorous identi-
stel...@erols.com.NOSPAM cation of the cause for ALL failures
Hi-Rel Digital Systems Design encountered for ALL phases of testing
... - Dr. Joseph F. Shea, Deputy
Director of Manned Space Flight, Spaceborne Computer Engineering
Conference, October, 1962.
Tom McWilliams
>
> Tom McWilliams wrote:
>
> > > > Another way to distinguish them might be that mission statements are
> > > > only testable based on intuitive conceptions, whereas goals can be tested
> > > > based on sensory perceptions.
> > >
> > > Too intellectual for me.
> >
> > Maybe the meta-model description is, but the actual distinction is easy
> > to apply.
>
> Glad you understand my educational level: 4th grade.
I don't buy it, but if you prefer simple language, I'm cool with that.
> Then why not
> describe things in terms us morons can understand, rather than
> pseudo-intellectual words and phrases that few others speak?
Sorry to say, my petulant pal, but there are an awful lot of
"pseudo-intellectual words and phrases that few others speak" pretty
much dominating this list, yet, despite your time here, I've yet to see
you gripe about anyone elses's use of them.
How odd! Have you see the FAQ, yet? How about the acronym glossary?
Are you sure you don't need help with, oh, just off-hand,
"differentiate" or perhaps "WF/PC II"? How about "PITA"?
In case that wasn't clear: You appear to have some kind of personal
problem with me, but don't choose to express it in the plain language
you seem to expect from me. How about it you stop fucking around as if
you don't, and express it?
Did you get that? Do you want even shorter, more common, words? I'm
here for you, brother.
> Dumb ol'
> me thinks that this is a public forum; of course, I remember what I
> think of people who talk like that in a public forum seem to be [and
> are].
Um...jumping to conclusions? No, that would be you, wouldn't it?
Condescending? Shoot, that would be you, again, in this post. Hmmm...
How about...sarca...no, that's you again, and I'm sure you would never
claim that you and I are in *any way whatsoever* similar.
Geez, I'm really running low on ideas here. Why don't you feel free to
tell me what I *am.* I am one giant ear-hole. Please, if you don't
just tell me, you'll probably be ingratiating and boring for god knows
how long, until you get it off your chest, so how about if you just cut
to the chase, hmmm?
> > > I found a site that reminds me of an old program that I wrote once and
> > > is quite applicable to this situation: the mission statement generator:
> > >
> > > http://www.bright.net/~flounder/mission.html
> >
> > Ha ha!! That's a much better version that the one I found:
> >
> > http://dack.com/web/bullshit.html
> >
> > Note that they are funny precisely because they fail the 'well-formed
> > goal' test - there's no way to tell if such mission statements get
> > fulfilled.
>
> I thank you for explaining to me why they are funny. I guess I couldn't
> have figured it out.
>
> Of course, I thought they were funny, but not for the reasons you told
> me I thought they were funny for. They're funny, to me, because they
> sound like dribble that comes out of manager's reports after a retreat
> with high-paid management consultants. You can think they are funny for
> the reasons that you think they are. I think it's perhaps a bit
> presumptuous [biggest word I know] for you to tell me why I think the
> material I presented is funny.
Look up "irony," a not-too-long word, and perhaps you will understand
how the unintended consequences expressed above, underlie your, and my,
reasons for laughing. It's not very presumptuous to recognize a common
principle.
Meanwhile, don't forget to come clean, as you evdiently aren't enjoying
youself much.
I mean, I tried to offer a different criteria for the difference between
goals and mission-statements, and you've just bitched about it, and made
insinuations about me.
If you don't like what I wrote, how about next time, instead of griping
at me, even as you fail to do the things you ask of me, you just don't
read what I write anymore?
rk
>>>>> Another way to distinguish them might be that mission statements are
>>>>> only testable based on intuitive conceptions, whereas goals can be tested
>>>>> based on sensory perceptions.
>>>>
>>>> Too intellectual for me.
>>>
>>> Maybe the meta-model description is, but the actual distinction is easy
>>> to apply.
>>
>> Glad you understand my educational level: 4th grade.
> I don't buy it, but if you prefer simple language, I'm cool with that.
OK, you're cool with it.
>> Then why not
>> describe things in terms us morons can understand, rather than
>> pseudo-intellectual words and phrases that few others speak?
> Sorry to say, my petulant pal, but there are an awful lot of
Hmm ... petulant. Another biggie. I thought we would talk at the 4th
grade level? ;)
> "pseudo-intellectual words and phrases that few others speak" pretty
> much dominating this list, yet, despite your time here, I've yet to see
> you gripe about anyone elses's use of them.
You are incorrect.
> How odd! Have you see the FAQ, yet? How about the acronym glossary?
> Are you sure you don't need help with, oh, just off-hand,
> "differentiate" or perhaps "WF/PC II"? How about "PITA"?
WF/PC II is a space term, not a PHL term. FAQ is a standard term. PITA
is a semi-standard term in space. And a funny one, too. Abbreviations
are used to abbreviate. Taking terms from your PHL class and using them
as you expect other people to know them is quite a bit different. But
of course you know that.
> In case that wasn't clear: You appear to have some kind of personal
> problem with me, but don't choose to express it in the plain language
> you seem to expect from me.
Already been done.
> How about it you stop fucking around as if
> you don't, and express it?
Already been done.
> Did you get that? Do you want even shorter, more common, words? I'm
> here for you, brother.
I'm glad.
< boring babble snipped >
> I mean, I tried to offer a different criteria for the difference between
> goals and mission-statements, and you've just bitched about it, and made
> insinuations about me.
Now, you *told* me "precisely why they were funny. I disagree. And I
said why I *thought* they were. Big difference. Think about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
rk From leaders, scientists, and
stellar engineering, ltd. engineers to managers, co-ordinators,
stel...@erols.com.NOSPAM and bureaucrats.
Hi-Rel Digital Systems Design -- rk, 2000
Derek Lyons
>Some further thoughts:
>
>To avoid the appearance of potential graft
>or corruption as operations grow a double
>entry bookkeeping method may be useful.
>
'I do not think that term means what you think it means'.
Michael R. Irwin
Derek Lyons wrote:
>
> "Michael R. Irwin" <mir...@harborside.com> wrote:
>
> >Some further thoughts:
> >
> >To avoid the appearance of potential graft
> >or corruption as operations grow a double
> >entry bookkeeping method may be useful.
> >
>
> 'I do not think that term means what you think it means'.
>
Which term?
Double entry bookkeeping? I did the books
for my own firm for 3 years before hiring
a bookkeeper. I still do the accounting.
I programmed the payroll in Excel, the bookkeeping
program we used initially had some inconvenient features and
it was easier to build and use the spreadsheet sum sheets.
As a consulting and services firm we did not
do much with inventory control. A occasional
analysis for a client, rare as material control
in factories is fairly specialized.
Another term may be more appropriate and
in common usage when using the techniques to
track material and credit/debit/cash flows through
a distributed warehouse system. Would you
happen to know appropriate buzzwords?
I assure you the methods can be applied to
dollars, books, boxes of fish, or aluminum
cans whether double, quaduple etc. sources
of half transactions are used and regardless of
whether the data vectors (real term from data
flow analysis techniques) are called bills of laden,
inventory count sheet, daily register, or
individual purchase transactions.
It is of course necessary to build the equations
and/or procedures such that the various checks and
balances are compared to one another appropriately
and money (fish, books, etc.) are not counted multiple
times in various checksums in the final results.
The purpose of course is to have sufficient
information from diverse sources to detect errors
and pinpoint them for correction.
It is interesting to note that many of the techniques are
similar whether they are called:
accounting methods
conservation of mass/energy calculations
statics/dynamics
data flow diagrams
or some other title implying arcane application
of arithmetric to a specialized field where data,
money value or mass/energy elements are transformed
but totals are approximately constant with known sources
and sinks.
Regards,
Mike Irwin
PS IIRC The original post involved palmtop or portable
computers. It would be possible to have a very
simple menu driven system where transactions between
Free Agents were tracked and fed to a central source
for processing. While the steady unknown sources and
sinks would make precision such as is used in a standard
warehouse logistics system impossible, some trending
information could certainly be extracted. Statistics
is a useful field of which I am woefully ignorant so
I shall not speculate much further in this direction
without some assistance.
Note however that certain materials flowing have fairly
localized sinks. It would not be reasonable for a
couple thousand Michigan return deposit cans to be
sinking in an Illinois based vehicle through normal
loss mechanisms. A brief correspondence with the
Agents in the area might pinpoint the problem for easy
resolution or the network might decide to route around
the agent with the local problem. Notice this could
be a kid or a vandal, it will usually not be a Free
Agent if they understand the nature of the transaction
tracking. The purpose of locks/procedures is to
keep honest men honest and provide accurate feedback
for improvement when the inevitable errors occur.
Tom McWilliams
> > I tried to offer a different criteria for the difference between
> > goals and mission-statements, and you've just bitched about it, and made
> > insinuations about me.
>
> Now, you *told* me "precisely why they were funny. I disagree. And I
> said why I *thought* they were. Big difference. Think about it.
I did think about it, and I think I was correct.
You said they were funny because of the way they sounded.
And the reason they sound that way, and are funny, is because mission
statements are not testable. If you wrote a testable one, it wouldn't
be a mission statement, wouldn't sound the way you described, and
wouldn't be nearly as funny.
It would, instead, be a goal, something useful which corporate execs at
retreats often don't have, or create.
rk
> > > I tried to offer a different criteria for the difference between
> > > goals and mission-statements, and you've just bitched about it, and made
> > > insinuations about me.
> >
> > Now, you *told* me "precisely why they were funny. I disagree. And I
> > said why I *thought* they were. Big difference. Think about it.
>
> I did think about it, and I think I was correct.
>
> You said they were funny because of the way they sounded.
>
> And the reason they sound that way, and are funny, is because mission
> statements are not testable.
They may be funny that way to you, not to me.
You can tell me why they are funny to you. And would assume that you
are correct and are not a liar or mistaken.
You can tell me why you think they are funny to you. And that would be
your opinion.
You can tell me why I think they are funny after I disagreed with your
explanation. That's nonsense. Of course, perhaps I'm doing that <fill
in fancy words>-thing, and pre-judging the crackpot who can read and see
inside people's minds.
As you said, describing your expertise:
I know how minds work, and have a pretty solid
understanding of how brains work. I can describe
both in clear, precise, consistent, unambiguous,
and useful ways, though you may not always find
it simple!
rk
Tom McWilliams
>
> Tom McWilliams wrote:
> > You said they were funny because of the way they sounded.
> >
> > And the reason they sound that way, and are funny, is because mission
> > statements are not testable.
>
> They may be funny that way to you, not to me.
First principles, rk. Humor is based on irony; multiple meanings and
unintended or unexpected outcomes.
You said you find them funny because they sound funny. I think they
sound
the way they do because they participate in the point I originally made;
they don't contain testable goals, and some people think mission
statements have meaning, and spend time on them, thinking so, but get an
unintended ouotcome: a useless goal.
Since you are an engineer with long experience, I would guess that
setting and acheiving goals is familiar to you, so you've learned well
the way to recognize when a goal is met, and set goals that are
measurable. Because of that, I'm not surprised that unmeasurable goals
sound funny to you.
rk
I think we got just about everything squared away in the other thread
which is good.
And welcome back to the group.
I don't want to spend too much time here. Just a final thought or two
then perhaps we can simply agree to disagree on why I think this is
funny.
> > > You said they were funny because of the way they sounded.
Actually, I said:
They're funny, to me, because they sound like dribble
that comes out of manager's reports after a retreat
with high-paid management consultants.
And you said:
And the reason they sound that way, and are funny, is
because mission statements are not testable.
> First principles, rk. Humor is based on irony; multiple meanings and
> unintended or unexpected outcomes.
I'll go to zeroth principles on this one. I never even thought about
them being funny because they are non testable. Of course, perhaps it
was unconcious. Thinking about it, the testability of the babble
doesn't come into play here, with my reading of the babble. Of course,
we can each think the babble is funny for different reasons. You seem
to be very test-centric, which is fine, so it's natural that you see
humor from that perspective. I see it from a different one. That fine
and ok. There are many things that can make things funny. Indeed, it
may even be funnier, to you, from a testability perspective. However,
that doesn't apply to me.
> You said you find them funny because they sound funny. I think they sound
> the way they do because they participate in the point I originally made;
> they don't contain testable goals, and some people think mission
> statements have meaning, and spend time on them, thinking so, but get an
> unintended ouotcome: a useless goal.
Analysis.
It appears that you think it's funny based on the outcome:
an untestable goal. That is, you think the outcome is
funny. You are laughing at the product.
I think they're funny because I'm laughing at the morons
who typically put this dribble together at expensive
management retreats and planning sessions. Of course, I
am not alone in laughing at these idiots who produce this
dribble. We must also include the high priced management
consultants.
> Since you are an engineer with long experience, I would guess that
> setting and acheiving goals is familiar to you, so you've learned well
> the way to recognize when a goal is met, and set goals that are
> measurable. Because of that, I'm not surprised that unmeasurable goals
> sound funny to you.
Since I am an engineer with a fair amount of experience in a variety of
organizations, I have seen a lot of morons over the year in management
[and some very good ones, I do have to make a living ;-] and bureaucracy
who actually think they are doing something with dribble like this and
other assorted crap as they and their fancy management consultants
"manage" without any knowledge of all at what they're managing. I
didn't come up with it but the saying is:
I don't know what you're doing but I can manage you.
So, to summarize, and I hope this is fair to your point of view.
You are laughing at the outcome, intellectually.
I am laughing at the morons who produce the outcome, in a mean-spirited
fashion.
The .sig selected for this post was not done at random.
Have a nice day,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
rk The Soviets no longer were a threat
stellar engineering, ltd. in space, and in the terms that
stel...@erols.com.NOSPAM became commonplace among the veteran
Hi-Rel Digital Systems Design ground crews, as well as the
astronauts, the dreamers and builders
were replaced by a new wave of NASA teams, bureaucrats who swayed with
the political winds, sadly short of dreams, drive, and determination
to keep forging outward beyond earth. -- Shepard and Slayton.