New Page for Draft Animal Logging Association Working Group

[Carl Russell]

Jason,I have a list of the names that you have thrown out. I am going to hold off adding any more names until we have responses from all of the people who were involved in the original discussion. We may have some that don’t want to participate, and I think we need to remember that this is a working group not the fledgling association.

From my experience in such groups it is important that the numbers be manageable, AND that each member is engaged, interested, and can make the time commitment. That is not to say that is not the case with the folks Jason suggests, it’s just an attempt on my part to make sure that we can get targeted and effect discussion, and from an administrative standpoint, I don’t want to spend a bunch of time deleting and re-entering names.

I am completely in favor of making sure we have a broad representation both geographically, and experientially. I say we give it a week or so for everyone to get logged in here and to offer other names and opinions about the size and operational strategy of this working group.

Also remember that this forum, while part of DAP, is not visible to anyone but those who I include on the master list. We need to try to remember which audience we are writing to, because it may appear that we are visible to everyone else because we can see everything on DAP, including this invisible forum.

More later. Looking like a promising day, interrupted by a radio interview at 1pm.

Carl

[Scott G]

Hello all,

Carl, I received the e-mail. You’re the man for setting this up. Phenomenal response so far! Let me know when you’ve heard back from everyone so we know when to start having some serious dialougue. I will still be in/out due to fair over the next couple of weeks but will be checking in periodically.

Great to have the international input so soon!

Take care,
Scott

[Gabe Ayers]

Carl,

What exactly is the procedure to post on this “secret” page to this group?

I am sort of computer challenged I suppose and can’t figure out how to just post to this group.

I also think the size of the group should not be limited at any stage of development and should include “proven practitioners” recommended by other members.

I appreciate your rejecting Bret, I will quit the entire effort if I have to deal with that sort of person in the process.

What were you thinking he would contribute Scott?

Proven practitioners are the key, if they aren’t actually doing this work then they shouldn’t be allowed in the exploratory committee.

Just my opinion.

Hopefully this won’t go to the entire membership, but as mentioned earlier I am not confident of the navigation here at this point. Thanks for making this simple enough that an old horselogger can figure it out.

Thanks for you help especially at this time of year when you are gearing up for your event.

[Carl Russell]

This page, entitled New Page for Draft Animal Logging Association Working Group is a private forum. It is viewable ONLY by people who are on a list to use it for issues pertaining to the group. It is also set to e-mail the content of each post to all people on the list, so that we all can keep up to date with what ever is going on without having to necessarily go to DAP to find out what has happened.

Post on here just as you would any other forum on DAP. It will only be seen by the people on the list in the first post of this thread.

Jason, I am not suggesting we limit the size of the group, only that the discussion that led to this development was one of working out details of a possible organization, and newsletter, and the pre-requisites for involvement have less to do with being proven horselogging practitioners than they do with having time, energy, commitment, and interest.

I think we should definitely invite new people into the “Working Group”, but for right now, I feel that it will be enough to just get those few of us that have already expressed interest to actually confirm some desired actions.

I will start another couple of threads. Anybody else can too.

Carl

[Scott G]

I agree with Carl & Jason; I do not think there should be a limit on numbers of folks with ideas. I do, however, believe when the “rubber hits the road” we need to decide/vote on a core group of decision makers. The more folks you have on a committee the more unwieldly and cumbersome the decision process can become. It is best to have a smaller group that represents all interests from the larger group as a whole. People that have a substantial background in the logging business are going to be the ones that can view an issue from all angles to hopefully put out a well rounded product that will appeal and have benefit to all.

Jason, my apologies. I saw Bret’s post on Yuku with his desire for more networking. The invite was ONLY for the general discussion on DAP about getting an organization revitalized, not for participating in the formative group. I didn’t see any of his posts, but from what I’ve learned the general impression was he was a beligerant, insulting mouth. I am a firm believer that all opinions matter in the big scheme of things. That said, it is expected that they be expressed in the form of calm, civil, and constructive debate. Insulting or berating someone and/or their beliefs is intolerable and has no place at any table. It has been said that using excessive derogatory statements and profanity is inversely proportional to one’s intelligence. Enough said..

Take care,
Scott

[john plowden]

message received – back from mass. – great week !! I’ll read and add thoughts in a bit –
John

[Carl Russell]

I have just added Ronnie Tucker to the list.
Welcome Ronnie,
Carl

[Author]

Posts