Dave and Gary, thanks hugely for your input. Gary, I quite agree with you about limiting the number of separate forums on the same topic.
I also think it was right on to direct anyone who wishes to continue the discussion to do so in the Improving PP forum. I posted one more reply to Mike (this might be easier if the private message function worked); hopefully, the matter is now over and the thread can return to being on-topic.
Steve
Member for
16 years 7 months
Member for16 years7 months
Submitted by Gary Whitehead on Mon, 2009-04-20 03:31
I agree with Dave. I don’t think you should take it as a threat that he "won’t interfere in your discussions unless absolutely necessary". I think he’s just saying if this seperate forum did exist, then he wouldn’t feel the need to post requests for simpler language and concepts.
I think having a seperate area for ’high planning principals’ is an awful idea. The main point of a forum like this is to get the range of views from a range of planning proffessionals on each topic. to deliberately seperate planners into different forums ruins this.
I also find Mike’s implication that the rest of us are incapable of following an acedemicaly written post vaguely offensive.
I havent read it carefully but I think he was suggesting to have a separate forum for complex or advanced techniques and that he would stay out of that forum.
Its not a threat.
I dont see the moderators role as forcing people to stay on topic. He can create his own threads about different topics or different levels of complexity as can anyone else.
I take it you are objecting to his post where he wrote:
"What are you going on about. This high arcane textual gibberish has no place in day to day project planning.
The poor guy who started this thread just wanted to know how to generate durations. I tried to tell him a simple method and then you two are off with the fairies - or is that the Pharoes? Please in future employ the KISS principle."
Its not the words of a diplomat but I dont think its uncivil. Admittedly it is heading that way. Rule 2 also states "...derisive / condescending posts will not be tolerated". I guess some professional people dont appreciate their thoughtful detailed posts being described as "gibberish" from folk who are "off with the fairies".
He has applied to become a moderator. If/when he becomes a moderator he may need to take more care to respect other people expressing their views.
Member for
20 years 7 monthsRE: Mike Testro
Dave and Gary, thanks hugely for your input. Gary, I quite agree with you about limiting the number of separate forums on the same topic.
I also think it was right on to direct anyone who wishes to continue the discussion to do so in the Improving PP forum. I posted one more reply to Mike (this might be easier if the private message function worked); hopefully, the matter is now over and the thread can return to being on-topic.
Steve
Member for
16 years 7 monthsRE: Mike Testro
I agree with Dave. I don’t think you should take it as a threat that he "won’t interfere in your discussions unless absolutely necessary". I think he’s just saying if this seperate forum did exist, then he wouldn’t feel the need to post requests for simpler language and concepts.
I think having a seperate area for ’high planning principals’ is an awful idea. The main point of a forum like this is to get the range of views from a range of planning proffessionals on each topic. to deliberately seperate planners into different forums ruins this.
I also find Mike’s implication that the rest of us are incapable of following an acedemicaly written post vaguely offensive.
Member for
17 years 1 monthRE: Mike Testro
I havent read it carefully but I think he was suggesting to have a separate forum for complex or advanced techniques and that he would stay out of that forum.
Its not a threat.
I dont see the moderators role as forcing people to stay on topic. He can create his own threads about different topics or different levels of complexity as can anyone else.
I take it you are objecting to his post where he wrote:
"What are you going on about. This high arcane textual gibberish has no place in day to day project planning.
The poor guy who started this thread just wanted to know how to generate durations. I tried to tell him a simple method and then you two are off with the fairies - or is that the Pharoes? Please in future employ the KISS principle."
Its not the words of a diplomat but I dont think its uncivil. Admittedly it is heading that way. Rule 2 also states "...derisive / condescending posts will not be tolerated". I guess some professional people dont appreciate their thoughtful detailed posts being described as "gibberish" from folk who are "off with the fairies".
He has applied to become a moderator. If/when he becomes a moderator he may need to take more care to respect other people expressing their views.