Hash: SHA1
Petri Mähönen wrote:
...
> Only slightly more seriously, we should also be realistic what re-
> engineering we can do for conferences/quality statements/etc. I think
> Joe has been doing
> a good work on this thread trying to stay his feet on ground and
> pointing out realities and taking into account different points of
> views.
>
> Petri
Thanks, Petri! I sincerely appreciate the support.
To all:
I have tried to keep things grounded in what is feasible for TCCC to
tackle, as Petri notes above. I hope I haven't given the impression that
any suggestions not pursued are less relevant, though. TCCC is only one
venue to effect change. There are others, including:
- going directly to the Comsoc representatives
(e.g., if you feel TCCC isn't representing your interest
sufficiently; I'm trying to gauge group consensus)
- taking matters into your own hands
(seriously - if you want a study and want the IEEE or anyone
else to fund it, write a proposal!!
If you want information that TCCC isn't providing but can provide a
draft, please do. we'd be glad to put it up on our web pages as a start.
If you want to see whether some of the changes suggested are useful,
offer to chair a workshop (Globecom is still taking proposals through
tomorrow!), and put your ideas into action.
I and the other officers of TCCC will certainly represent your interests
as a group, but please remember you each can do a lot as an individual too!
Joe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
iEYEARECAAYFAksm29EACgkQE5f5cImnZrtrnwCgmDAQiyTQisKvNFd71Gh8I9y9
DqIAoMAQh8aCsdSDBbrYc65Kdi9f1MF0
=NN9D
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Tccc mailing list
Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment