[OPE-L:6775] Re: Re: list procedures and coordination

From: Simon Mohun (s.mohun@qmul.ac.uk)
Date: Tue Mar 19 2002 - 19:03:38 EST

What would/could such a committee actually do?


At 07:19 19/03/02 -0500, you wrote:
>Re Alfredo's [6764]:
>In principle, I am not opposed to the following (indeed if done
>_well_ it would be a great benefit to both the list  and myself) but
>-- as they say -- "the devil is in the details".
>E.g.  -- no offense intended to anyone in particular -- there are
>some listmembers for whom it would be  absolute hell to work
>with on such a committee (and indeed would *greatly* raise my
>stress level and time commitment).  So, an absolute pre-requisite
>for me is  that whichever individuals are part of this committee are
>easy to work with.  I don't think that asking  on-list for  volunteers
>will ensure this (or the following) result.   Instead, I think it would
>be better if individual listmembers (bearing the following paragraph
>in mind) were asked.
>In general,  I think the list would be best served -- *if* we decide to
>go ahead with Alfredo's proposal -- by a *SMALL* group  (a large
>committee would be very stressful and a real killer)  of people who
>are respected by all and considered to be fair, who represent diverse
>theoretical and political  perspectives,  and who come from various
>parts of the world. A committee of  4-5 listmembers besides myself
>should be large enough to be moderately representative but small
>enough to be workable. I would anticipate, within this new structure,
>remaining list coordinator for the foreseeable future.
>However, other than Alfredo, no one else has made their thoughts
>known about his proposal and I would  feel a lot better before going
>ahead with this change if I knew that is what the rest of you want.
>In solidarity, Jerry
> >>> Everyone knows that I admire and fully support Jerry's extraordinary 
> work on OPE-L. Jerry has been carrying this heavy burden carefully and 
> conscientiously for several years, and he deserves nothing but admiration 
> for what he, and the list as a whole, have achieved, and will continue to 
> achieve in the future.
>However, recent events show that Jerry has been put in a disadvantaged and 
>very exposed position, and this is both unfair and wrong. In order to 
>fulfil his multiple tasks as list co-ordinator and mediator, Jerry has 
>been put in the impossible position of having to relate to all of us, both 
>simultaneously and separately, at different levels at the same time. This 
>may be one of the main reasons why Jerry is vulnerable to disagreement - 
>even at a personal level - with good friends and comrades, even with risk 
>to his own health (as he explained in a recent message). These are things 
>that we can all live without, and Jerry neither needs nor deserves this 
>type of aggravation.
>I would like to make a proposal, which I will do in good faith - I will 
>also withdraw this proposal should Jerry or others object. In these 
>matters, consensus is the only way forward. I think that the list would 
>benefit if Jerry selected, or if we somehow chose, a very small number of 
>people to help Jerry, Allin and Rakesh with different aspects of the 
>management of the list.
>A measure of collective responsibility in day-to-day management would 
>allow Jerry to maintain his involvement with the list while reducing the 
>degree of his personal exposure, thus preserving his own work and life 
>from any conflicts that may arise on OPE-L.
>Having said this, I want to reiterate that I fully support and admire 
>Jerry's work. Moreover, this proposal is not meant to exclude anyone from 
>anything - the idea is, rather, to allow everyone to feel *included* 
>while, at the same time, reducing Jerry's own exposure and eliminating the 
>personal aspect of the disagreements that we have experienced recently. <<<

Department of Economics,
Queen Mary, University of London,
Mile End Road,
London E1 4NS,

Tel: +44-(0)20-7882-5089 (direct)
+44-(0)20-7882-5095/6 (Dept. Office)
Fax: +44-(0)20-8983-3580

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Apr 02 2002 - 00:00:06 EST