[Artemisia] Re: thought for discussion-

[Greg Olsen]

> not everyone has had the opportunity to hear the definitions that I
have, 
> we've already determined that I don't remember it correctly so I need
a 
> refresher, and the idea behind the discussion was to get input on the
definitions 
> and give people a rough sketch of what is considered by Peers and 

This is what I am saying. The list you refer to is one list, and by many
accounts an incomplete list. You would probably be better off asking
each peer for their general list of Virtues, Pillars, attributes,
whatever, and ask them to go into detail about what they feel comprises
them.  But even that will only go so far because each Peer more than
likely views each candidate in a different light.  Each candidate is
after all their own person, with their own history, circumstances,
skills, etc.  So even if a Peer does have a well defined idea of the
things to look at, it gets revised/tweaked each time to suit the person
they evaluate.  And that is assuming the Peer in question even has a
firm idea on what they like to look for in the firm place. Yes I know it
is heresy to say that Peers don't have all the answers sorted out. :)

> what they should consider before recommending someone.

If someone would like to recommend anyone for any award, they shouldn't
hesitate to do so. They just need to understand that it may not be acted
upon and that inaction is neither a slam on the recommended nor the
recommender.

Gregory

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.gallowglass.org/pipermail/artemisia/attachments/20031107/c7b1c25f/attachment.htm