Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

heidi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> 4) Additional discussion would not have added one iota to enlightening 
> any of us further on this issue, nor would it have changed the outcome 
> of a vote--therefore additional discussion was utterly pointless. I for 
> one really appreciated the fact that Mike ran a very tight meeting in 
> which we got through a lot of material in a limited time, and I REALLY 
> appreciated getting to leave just a tad early as a result, which meant I 
> could catch an earlier plane and get home before 3 a.m.!

Some had suggested taking the money out of the research funds, as it was 
for research, but that amount wasn't available in the Research 
Committee's budget.  But no one had yet raised the option of using 
general funds instead of drug testing funds.  So although it was clear 
the money was going to be donated, there was still a possibility of 
using a different source.  As you pointed out, we were ahead of 
schedule, going to the "nuclear option" of cutting off debate wasn't 
necessary.

Indeed, that was the only "clinker" in what had up until then been a 
very congenial meeting.


--
Joe Long
jlong@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp
Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp

Ride Long and Ride Safe!!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=