SUO: Re: Topic :> Desecration Of Principle
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
Matthew,
Ah yes! How fondly I look back on the prodigal days of my youth,
when I could afford to waste a post, and, needles to say, every
one else's time and limited capacity for attention on a snappy
comeback like that.
And what a convenience of argument to have your respondent in irons.
Or iron-e, as the case may be.
| PUBLIC NOTICE
|
| Dear Mr. West:
|
| Your grace note quota for today is now e-xhausted --
| all subsequent postings will be held to the highest,
| although implicit, non-up-front, sub rosa, tacit, and
| unwritten "Standards", if you'll e-cuse the e-pression.
|
| Implicitly yours,
|
| The Unwritten Management,
| IEEE Standard Unwritten Ontology Unworking Group
I hope that you will find it in your heart to forgive
that late unpleasantness of '76 between our Foreparents
on something like this very score. Recent developments
tend to suggest that All Is Forgiven, and we're all going
back to "nominal" representation and "nominally" responsible
"forms of government" (FOG's) as the nominal norm of society.
Now that's what I call snappy.
Jon Awbrey
PS. <JA, 06 Dec 2003, 02>
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE wrote:
>
> Dear Jon,
>
> >
> > Extra Credit Question. What does Shutness encourage?
> >
> MW: isolation.
>
> Matthew West
> Principal Consultant
> Shell Information Technology International Limited
> Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
> Email: matthew.west@shell.com
> Internet: http://www.shell.com
> http://www.matthew-west.org.uk
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jon Awbrey [mailto:jawbrey@att.net]
> > Sent: 05 December 2003 00:48
> > To: SUO; West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE
> > Subject: Re: Topic :> Definition Of Principle
> >
> >
> > o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
> >
> > Topic :> Principle. http://suo.ieee.org/email/thrd4.html#11641
> >
> > JA = Jon Awbrey
> > MW = Matthew West
> >
> > Running summary of remarks on the Topic of Principles.
> >
> > 1. In reference to:
> >
> > Topic :> Principle 1. http://suo.ieee.org/email/msg11641.html
> >
> > Reiterated thus:
> >
> > JA: 1. What is a principle?
> >
> > AKA: axiom, canon, guideline, law,
> > maxim, norm, regulation, rule, etc.
> >
> > JA: 2. What are our principles?
> >
> > Matthew replied:
> >
> > MW: A guiding truth, but note that you should never let
> > your principles prevent you from doing what's right.
> >
> > 2. In reference to:
> >
> > Topic :> Principle 2. http://suo.ieee.org/email/msg11712.html
> >
> > Reiterated thus:
> >
> > JA: I have been asking about the broader principles of procedure
> > that the details of implementation are meant to flesh out,
> > since the nuts and bolts are irrelevant if the big ideas
> > fail to be realized, and we lose sight of these guiding
> > lights at the peril of the whole enterprise, indeed,
> > of its due place within the larger human picture.
> >
> > JA: Can you give the foremost examples of principles, either in the
> > sense of "guiding truths", or in any other sense of the word,
> > that you would have embodied in the Procedure specification,
> > and by virtue of its utility in the SUO Group, to become
> > embodied in the procedures themselves of this Group?
> >
> > Matthew replied:
> >
> > MW: The principles of the Procedures Manual are those
> > of Quality Management. We have our own internal
> > documents on QM but looking at Amazon I see that
> > 'Managing Quality', edited by Barrie G. Dale seems
> > to be a standard text (though I have not read it).
> >
> > MW: To summarise QM: For a product, quality is about
> > being "fit for purpose". A feature that prevents
> > the product from being fit for purpose is a defect.
> > Improving quality is therefore about identifying and
> > eliminating defects.
> >
> > MW: My experience with using this approach is that it tends
> > to produce more constructive and structured discussions.
> > Instead of getting statements like "I think we should do X",
> > you get something like "The A feature prevents us from doing B.
> > If we did X this would enable us to do B".
> >
> > MW: I have seen this turn around projects that were going in circles
> > to enable them to gain traction, and remove personal conflict that
> > often arises in opinion based debate.
> >
> > 3. In another message:
> >
> > MW: Openness encourages good behaviour.
> >
> > MW: The principles of Quality Management.
> > In particular that we are "engineers"
> > delivering a product that needs to be
> > fit for purpose.
> >
> > Extra Credit Question. What does Shutness encourage?
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
http://www.cs.bsu.edu/homepages/mighty/history.html
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o