atw: Re: Inaction items
- From: Peter G Martin <peter.martin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Steve Hudson <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 11:58:17 +1000
Steve:
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 00:27:16 +1000, you wrote:
> Stewie, I have seen this stuff before. It is oft put
> under "Future action actions", "To be discussed later
> pending <outcomes>" etc. I wont assume you are being
> disparaging, I will just say it is fairly common to
> have all input from a meeting output as comments for
> future action - like any good process all inputs must
> be rep'd by an output because the second law of
> thermodynamics holds true for data.
>
Three concepts in common usage, one in computing, the second
in physics, and the third in common business practice would
appear to bring into question the idea that there is a
necessary one-to-one relationship between meeting input and
output:
1. The bit bucket (aka \dev\null)
2. The black hole
3. The Rule of the keeper of the minutes
--Peter M
**************************************************
To post a message to austechwriter, send the message to
austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe to austechwriter, send a message to
austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "subscribe" in the Subject field.
To unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
"unsubscribe" in the Subject field.
To search the austechwriter archives, go to
www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter
To contact the list administrator, send a message to
austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
**************************************************
Other related posts:
