...just because we don’t know the meaning of eschatology it’s not the end of the world?

Or else a lot of time could be saved by scheduling meeting shorter…

I think it shows how important the issues really are and how much is at stake.

Kendall, three dysfunctional meetings.

It is very difficult put together a document that says that GC or HOB will do what the Windsor Report of DES asks, but actually allows TEC to do what it wants without consequence.

It is all according to the axiom that work expands to fill the time.  If the meeting were shorter, they would get their work done quicker.

I don’t expect a Tanzania Communique out of this. The English group ‘Changing Attitudes’ really span that one with what struck me as misinformation about the likely outcome, and then came the ticking bomb (which RW is trying to defuse). But this isn’t Dar es Salaam.  I expect dishonest obfuscatory language (‘Let your no be “we need to listen more” etc) but no repentance. I hope I’m wrong but I see no evidence to make me think otherwise.

Yes, important documents often call for negotions right down to the wire. Is this not true of so many treaty negotiations between nations, and contract talks between union and management? When the stakes are high and the outcome is very important, of course, deliberations will come right down to the deadline. Let our prayer be that the Holy Spirit will lead the bishops to make wise decisions—and try to avoid being cynical about it.

It’s almost like:
“Hey let’s get together for a big ‘hug-fest’ and if we feel like it, we can also do some of the business that we were asked to do while we were together anyway.”

Kendall ... I’m tempted to tell you my opinion of what I think it means, but I have this nagging voice in the back of my mind of my mother instructing me in my youth ... something about if I don’t have anything nice to say than ...

I cannot wait to see the English language strained to the breaking point.  It will take quite a linguistic exercise and I don’t for one moment underestimate those charged with drafting the statement.

Making decisions toward the end of a process is in keeping with the Pareto Principle: 20% of the causes yield 80% of the results.

General examples:
—- 20% of your pea pods produce 80% of your total pea harvest
—- 20% of your sales force generates 80% of your sales
—- 20% of your problems generate 80% of your headaches

Points especially relevant here:
—- We do 80% of our work in 20% of the time we spend working
—- People in a meeting make 80% of the decisions in 20% of the meeting time