[CPN] Discussion to incorporate elements of CMB proposal

[David Tank]

Thanks for the edits - much better.  Like Phil, I did not think of this as a closed matter and that is why this oversight happened - this is what I told the author that contacted me and they understood, but were still disappointed.

I agree with David that we do need to establish a standard procedure on who informs who when. I think that after any vote on a proposal it makes sense for the Secretary or Chair to communicate the results - which one does not matter to me, we just need to decide.

David, I don't think we need to add your name specifically to this - with no procedure in place, this is no one's fault.

Anyway, I will send this email to the CPN and the authors now.

Dave
  

On May 11, 2012, at 2:23 PM, David Marjanovic wrote:

> 
>> Here is a suggested revision of Dave's message to them:
>> 
>> Thank you for your thoughtful proposal for changes to the PhyloCode, with respect to species.  The CPN has voted to reject the proposal as an entire entity but also decided to continue discussion to determine if there are elements of your proposal that we would like to incorporate in the next revision of the draft code.  I apologize on behalf of the CPN for not having informed you promptly about the initial vote, an oversight that was related to the fact that we are still discussing elements of the proposal and thus view the decision-making process as still in progress.  At the conclusion of this discussion, we will inform you of the outcome as well as posting the CPN decision on the news section of the ISPN website.
>> 
>> How does this sound?
> 
> Good. Just remove the first comma -- and add my name somewhere, changing "I" to "we", because it might be considered my logical duty (as the Secretary and/or as a member of the Publicity Committee) to send out such information. We should probably establish a standard procedure on who informs which people when.
> 
> As a contribution to the ongoing discussion, I'll soon repost my proposal for a revision of Art. 21 that includes some but not all parts of the rejected proposal. I just need to find it...
> _______________________________________________
> CPN mailing list
> CPN at listserv.ohio.edu
> http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserv.ohio.edu/pipermail/cpn/attachments/20120511/50fe19db/attachment.html