>Matthew wrote:
>
>>As I said, you as a group either agree to the terms of having the
>>discussions or you don't have the discussions, period. That does not
>> mean the discussions are not taking place.
>

and Wirt responded:

>If you adopt that position, that of a supplicant at the feet
>of HP, you've lost before you have begun.


I cannot disagree more. When two organizations with specific interests
attempt to come to agreement on terms that are acceptable to both there
needs to
be an ability to hold those discussions in a forum that fits both
organizations.

The organization that 'wants' might have to give a little to be able to
engage
the organization that 'has' in meaningful dialogue. This doesn't mean the
'wants'
are automatically lost WRT final terms.

You trust your negotiating team to represent your interests, and that they
will not
agree to final terms that are outside the needs of your organization.

If you don't trust your negotiating team then you either have to quit the
team or
you have to get active and become part of the negotiating team.

Go ask Scott McNealy of Sun and Steve Ballmer of Microsoft how far their
discussions
would have progressed if they were to be held in public :-)

duane

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *