On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Melinda Shore
<melinda(_dot_)shore(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>wrote:
On 8/6/13 11:58 AM, Joe Abley wrote:
For what it's worth (not much) I would miss the line at the mic.
There are useful conversations that happen within the line that I
think we would lose if the mic followed the speaker, and I also think
that pipelining the people at the mic promotes more fluid
conversation. But these are minor points, and I'm mainly just waxing
nostalgic.
I actually think that this is not a small point. The people in
line are the people with issues and the ability to hash stuff out
quickly is pretty nice
They can also negotiate and reorganize each other.
For example, if I am at the mic wanting to raise a new topic and there is
someone with an issue on the current one they will usually ask if they can
cut in. Another frequent case is when someone raises an issue and someone
actually knows the answer.
That sort of thing can be pretty important when a statement of fact is made
that is wrong, particularly when it is the alleged opinion of someone else.
In Orlando someone asserted X had stated Y would happen which being in the
security area and knowing that Y was idiotic and X was most unlikely to
have said it, I pointed out that the speaker had likely misunderstood. When
I later met up with X they were surprised anyone would think they thought Y
because that would be idiotic.
--
Website: http://hallambaker.com/