Re: Tuesday meetings -- the semantics of "Reminder" vs "Confirmation"

Hi Charlie,

Regrets, I could not attend today.
I agree that the global HCLS calls should be "on" by default.
The task force calls, however, may require a bit more preparation from the
chairs and as such, may need further confirmation on whether they will
happen or not... I was hoping that with this new system all I had to do was
manage this in the google calendar, which I did. What went wrong with the
calendar of the global HCLS call today?

Best,
Lena

On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Mead, Charlie (NIH/NCI) [C] <
meadch@mail.nih.gov> wrote:

> All –****
>
> ** **
>
> It appears that there is some confusion – and, as a result, we had a short
> discussion on today’s “Tuesday HCLS call” – of the meaning – dare I say
> “the semantics -- of the terms Reminder vs Confirmation as those terms
> apply to the Tuesday 11am EDT HCLS calls.  It is my understanding that
> although I and the other HCLS CoChairs <<should>> send out a <<reminder>>
> about the meeting, the absence of a reminder – for whatever reason – is
> <<not>> a de facto <<cancellation>> of the meeting, i.e. the meetings do
> <<not>> require a formal <<confirmation>> to occur, and the absence of a
> reminder should not be interpreted as a cancellation.  They are on our
> respective calendars and unless a particular meeting is formally cancelled,
> it is assumed to be on, irrespective of whether the CoChair remembers/has
> the time to send out a formal reminder.****
>
> ** **
>
> Thoughts?****
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks in advance –****
>
> ** **
>
> charlie****
>



-- 
Helena F. Deus
Post-Doctoral Researcher at DERI/NUIG
http://lenadeus.info/