Charlie
For example lets "SAY" I am Japanese
I neither said I was Japanese or indicated in any way I
was Japanese. The operative word in the sentence is SAY ie I am making an analogy to indicate to you that if I were Japanese I might be upset. Similar to say I were a Philipino.
As to whether I know the Japanese once again your are reaching a conclusion before gathering the facts.
However Charlie "Wah Karamasta" (sic) maybe you should also do the same.
As to American English this is not a language Americans speak American or at least some do some speak Chililean, Mexican, Peurto rican etc.
English is English not a bastardised apology for a language given a title by Microsoft. And if that offends tough
As to reading before writing I agree with Chris

Clive

Hello Chris,

Im not a native english speaker and my education follows the American english.

What i understand in the study of logic (this started with the Greek anyway) is that the argument must be true to arrive at a logical conclusion.

I will live it to our colleague in PP to evaluate the conclusion that you drive in your previous post if that match with your argument. You have to understand that if your conclusion match your arguments then one of those arguments is false.

You look back in your previous post and find a way to make it clear what you want with regards to New Modifications in Forum. In this way, you will not be confuse and straightforward tell PP this is what you want.

This is the only way for you to get what you want.

Cheers,

Charlie

Charlie,

Once again you have demonstrated that you don’t read the post before replying. If you can go back to my posts and show where I said that people had no right to suggest a "wish list" then please do so. The only thing that I said was:

"On the whole, I think Shahzad’s approach is the best for the moment. Let PP Admin tell us what modifications are to be made for 2006, and once we know that, we can make some suggestions of our own which will compliment and augment them and allow us to get the best out of PP."

I really don’t think that is unreasonable or restrictive.

Isn’t it strange, Charlie, that on one hand you say "this is a free forum for every member to express their ideas", but when I express mine, suddenly Charlie you say "but Chris had no right to restrain you to say it to PP."

Now to me that sounds as if you want to take away my right to express my opinion. You can’t have it both ways, Charlie, we all have a right to express our opinions, not just you.

Chris Oggham

Charlie,

Suggest you read all of a post before replying, my Private Mail to you will explain why.

Chris Oggham

Hi Clive,

There is a fallacy in your statement "for example I am a Japanese" Firstly your example is wrong because you are not a Japanese. You really dont know the Japanese

Hence, the following statement "would i consider your comments about Japanese project management derogatory?" is inconclusive for the reason that there is no specific comments available for me to based my opinion.

In general, it would be of great improvement to PP if we have some Japanese involved in PP forum.

Regards,

Charlie

Hi Charlie,

I understand where you are coming from, I think; you want Planning Planet to be more membership driven, and that’s not a bad idea. However, because PP is run by volunteers and they have to earn a living (something we can all identify with) the amount of time they can devote to PP is limited. Imagine how much work they would have if every PP member gave them a "wish list" of modifications, they would be swamped with work, that’s the disadvantage. The advantage is that because these volunteers are members of PP themselves, they have a pretty good idea of expectations and requirements and can structure the modifications to take account of this.

I agree with you that flaming can be a problem, although sometimes a provocative statement or question can trigger a useful and productive discussion. You are quite right, though, in saying that moderators must ensure that the forum guidelines and rules are adhered to. To be fair, I think that the moderators do a pretty good job, sometimes even being seen as a little over-zealous.

I also agree with you that it would be good to see more participation by people from other countries and cultures. This would give an increased spectrum of viewpoints which could only benefit PP. I believe that as word about PP gets around this will happen, we just need to wait for a bit, although it would be great if it could happen sooner rather than later.

On the whole, I think Shahzad’s approach is the best for the moment. Let PP Admin tell us what modifications are to be made for 2006, and once we know that, we can make some suggestions of our own which will compliment an augment them and allow us to get the best out of PP.

Regards

Chris Oggham.