<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 3:17 AM, Reinier Bakels <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:r.bakels@pr.unimaas.nl">r.bakels@pr.unimaas.nl</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="Ih2E3d">
Reinier Bakels wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Thx4 your since comments.<br>
Some preliminary answers.<br>
First, my schedule simply did not allow me to react earlier.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
So, just because you've been 'too busy' (we're ALL busy people) and finally found time in your schedule for us, we're supposed to drop what 12 people have worked on quite a bit?<br>
</blockquote>
"What two people can do in two weeks, three people can do in three weeks." More people is not always efficient.</blockquote><div><br><br>The objective is not the "efficiency", but the consensus of all the implied parties.<br>
<br>The manifesto can be better or worse, but the most important thing is that all parties agree with it (or, at least, nobody disagrees).<br><br>Having a "joint/common" manifesto is much more important than having a "perfect" manifesto.<br>
<br></div></div>