[EVALUATION] - E04 - Leadership! Google, Guido van Rossum, PSF

[Ilias Lazaridis]

Martin P. Hellwig wrote:
> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>> Martin P. Hellwig wrote:
>>> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>>> <cut>
>>> I'm suspecting that we have different definitions (or at least the 
>>> implications of that) of used terms.
>>> I think it's important to first define these definition in a form 
>>> acceptable to both of us.
>>>
>>> In the link you gave, the title was "Efficiency Management".
>>> Now I believe that in _most_ implementations the words in the titles 
>>> are mutual exclusive. So my first question is, please define 
>>> "Efficiency" my second one is, please define "Management".
>>
>> "
>>     *  The terminology is not yet aligned to commonly used business or 
>> standards organisation terminology [like e.g. ISO].
>>     * This will happen after the process definition has finalized.
>> "
>> source: http://lazaridis.com/efficiency/process.html (V 0.8c - alpha)
>>
>> -
>>
>> I am a few steps from having the final diagramms ready, then I can 
>> align the terminology (e.g. asking for feedback, thus people can 
>> detect existent constructs and suggest terminology changes)
>>
>> I'll send you an email with some details (thus we don't discuss this 
>> off-topic in public).
>>
>> .
>>
>  > Ilias Lazaridis wrote in email:
>  > Hi,
>  >
>  > just point me to a website you are related to (your personal one, 
>  > your business one, ...) and I'll initialize the process, as defined in 
>  > the draft-document:
>  >
>  > http://lazaridis.com/efficiency/textual.html
>  >
>  > -
>  >
>  > What I need at this point:
>  >
>  > - Website adress
>  > - your requirements & constraints for my processing
> 
> Hey,
> 
> I respond on your "private" mail and list in one and to both, I don't 
> regard this as off-topic because it is still in regard of your OP, 
> although that post can be seen as a bait to go OT.

You should not reproduce private conversation on public media.

> I didn't ask you for making an analyze, I asked you for your definitions 
> because I think they are not the same as used in my contexts.
[...]

Making an small analysis can assist you to understand the terminology 
(and me to align the terminology). You are free to reject this.

As I am free to terminate the discussion here.

Feel free to contact me with private email (after a few hours).

Thank you.

.

-- 
http://lazaridis.com