Re: Re: Sticking point

Hi Charlie,

Charlie Poole wrote:

[big snip]

> My point here is that the simple division
> between technical and non-technical isn't
> really sufficient. Things are more complicated
> than that.

I never said it was sufficient.  Just FYI, I've always found that models
don't even start to become interesting until they account for "3."  Having
said that, I'm using the XP definition, as printed.  If seperating decisions
into business and technical works for XP, why do you think it's insufficient
for the discussion?

> I'm not arguing for my own personal model
> to be use, but simply pointing out that some
> such model is needed to structure discussion.
> Defining the topic by what _isn't_ in it seems
> like a smell to me and I've been trying in some
> recent posts to articulate why. Hope this helps.

I can tell you've put a lot of thought into this and I don't want to do
anything but encourage you because it really doesn't.  I can tell you're not
comfortable, but I can't tell what it is that's causing you trouble.  If I
had to take a stab at repeating back what you've told me, it seems like a
discomfort that there's going to be a decision made somewhere that you
didn't get to participate in and with which you disagree.  Is that anywhere
close?

> I'm not quite sure how we got here from the topic of daily exercise
though.
> ;-)

Me either, but I'm willing to be led ;-)

Best regards,
Bill


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get 128 Bit SSL Encryption!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/CBxunD/vN2EAA/xGHJAA/NhFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
extremecustomering-unsubscribe-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/