Subject:
|
Re: Triangle folks
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 26 Mar 1999 07:25:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5802 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, lehman@javanet.com (Todd Lehman) writes:
> [...]
> 5. Didn't want to be stuck having to take the time to think about the
> creation of new loc groups every few days whenever the need arose.
> All the thought (for better or for worse) went into a single week-
> long marathon of atlas-studying in September.
> [...]
I should add that about the only other thing I did during that week was
shower and eat. So it was an intense bit of work, and the rationale
behind probably 90% or more of the decisions made are long forgotten. (It
would not have been possible to document all the rationale and still get
it done in a week -- not with 600 groups and 100 maps to go through.)
I certainly don't mind making corrections if there are mistakes anywhere,
and I also don't mind adding new items that were overlooked, but you have
to understand that when I get psycho-intense on something and really go
all-out, it can be difficult later to convince me that something really
was overlooked (as opposed to it having been considered but the rationale
having been forgotten).
I anticipated most of the questions/concerns that have come up so far in
connection with the loc groups -- so I hope I don't sound callous. There
just aren't "clean" solutions to things like the Triangle area of NC.
(Prove me wrong, though! :)
--Todd
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Triangle folks
|
| (...) You say -the- Triangle group but -a- Triad group. Maybe I'm reading into this, but I have to ask... I gather that there is a well-defined "The Triangle" -- I've heard of its existence before. How about "Triad" -- is there a well-defined "The (...) (28 years ago, 26-Mar-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
9 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
