On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Frank Cox <theatre@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:37:02 -0800 > Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Unfortunately, while a policy for future incidents would be nice, I don't set > it as a priority item at this time. When your house is burning down, you don't > send out a rfq for fire sprinkler systems. Oh you've taken Apocolaptic Allogories 101? I took advanced Rhetorical Rhetoric. This should be fun. I also do not stand in the way of the fire fighters and asking them questions as to what's happening while they are putting the fire out. Nor do I do it to the fire investigators who poke around in the ashes trying to figure out whats wrong. And last time I set a house on fire, it took weeks for the fire department to confidently determine that it was arson...and that was just a house fire. When I blew up that chemical plant that one time, it took months to finally determine the cause. I doubt there's much here for me to add. I do not have any details as to the current sutation. I am not one of the fire fighters nor am I one of the fire investigators. I am just one of the City Council members who need to make sure the fire fighters and fire investigators are following documented procedures with regard to how to communicate to the public. And if they don't have those procedures, I back their asses up when they have to make a judgement call. I've pointed where I think constructive conversation should go. If you don't want to be a part of that conversation, that's perfectly okay with me. In fact I'm thrilled by the fact that you don't see the policy need as a priority. Hopefully that means you'll keep your noise out of it while more experienced people work on it. -jef -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list