[Squeakfoundation]re: Guide number, roles

[Craig Latta]

Hi hi--

> Ok, since noone is touching this potato I will do it...

	Please don't assume the (temporary) lack of a response indicates an
apprehensiveness about responding. :)

	I thought the point about having an odd number of guides was
interesting, but it's not clear to me that the Guides as a group would
really need a "tie-breaking" capability. At this point, I'm tempted to
wait until such a situation arises before making policy. Of course, the
size of the group would become unwieldy at some point. Starting from
scratch, I think I would have chosen the number seven; it seems like a
good tradeoff between the amount of work there is to do and the overhead
of coordination (and why not throw in the tie-breaking thing for free
:).

	In sum, the current six is fine with me, and I also wouldn't object to
seven. Five or fewer seems like not enough, given the amount of work
there seems to be. True, there are plenty of roles one can serve apart
from the Guides, but several of the Guide tasks you mentioned wold
benefit uniquely from the concerted small-group effort that the Guides
can provide.

	I've confirmed my current entry on the role page. :)


	thanks!

-C

--
Craig Latta
improvisational musical informaticist
craig@netjam.org
www.netjam.org/resume
Smalltalkers do: [:it | All with: Class, (And love: it)]