Hello, On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 09:49:11AM +0200, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: > Am Dienstag, 8. September 2009 23:40:24 schrieb Sergiu Ivanov: > > > Also I assume that in the time we already spent on discussing where to > > > put the information, we could already have written and then reworked a > > > good part it - and moved it later in less than a minute after getting > > > feedback. > > > > Well, that's true :-) > > It's a trap into which groups often seem to fall (in my experience).
I've encountered this problem several times myself; it is one of those which make themselves known only after one has fallen into it. > So I *try* to keep in mind how much time solving the problem and > fixing it afterwards will take, and when the discussion gets longer > than solution + fix (+ some buffer), I try to just go for the > solution. My strategy is to try to fix some decisions which tend to appear in the flow of discussion and include them in some (temporary) roadmap. Thus all the way throughout the discussion items get into the plan and, even if some details generate an infinite loop, I can always implement the already included points. > That doesn't say I always manage to do it ;) I can acknowledge a similar issue about my strategy :-) Regards, scolobb
