Re: Re: How about a sample conversion to HQ2?

From: Benedict Adamson <yahoo_at_...>
Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2009 00:08:00 +0100


John Machin wrote:
...
> I think... some
> assets assigned to expectations management would not go astray.
...
> There are always resourcing reasons to avoid "best practice" in my
> opinion

...

If Gloranthan publishing was more like a business and less like a hobby, I'd agree with you. But everyone except Greg works in their spare time for only nominal payment. Even Greg, the only full timer, is (I believe) paid little.

To talk about assets and resourcing in this context seems, well,... bizarre. When people do things in their spare time out of love, they do what they like doing. If that means things that you or I want to be done don't get done... tough for us.

By profession, I'm a programmer. I've also been a contributor to an open source software project, so I've seen the other side. I've seen people turn up, stated how things should or should not be, and criticised the hard work of others, but contributed nothing. At best these people are politely ignored. As they should be.

Arguably, every e-mail written by David Dunham, Jeff Richards or Rick Meints about the HQ2 project, and the publication of the Continuum draft rules, were all resources expended on expectations management.

Powered by hypermail