Originally posted by Bill Cody:
I propose that before Gator does the final stocking, the active and interested board members arrive at a consensis of how Gator should conduct this study. However, we can easily leave it up to Gator and Deb to see what transpires.
Gator, you and you alone should decide what you want to accomplish and the resulting plan for accomplishing it. Getting everyone's input is fine, but I respectively disagree with Bill's idea of requiring a consensus from a designated set of board members. As a professional engineer, I've seen the results of "consensus" decision making...it isn't usually pretty.
If your objective is to evaluate Deb's program, then it would seem a fair evaluation of that program would have to include key components/metrics from the program. Deb, it seems to me, should be able to define those key components/metrics and your decision is then to either do that or not.
Maybe that's an oversimplification, on my part, but if the test is of GG's and the associated program, then why is a consensus required or even desirable?
If the test has a different objective, e.g. stocking according to Pond Boss board consensus, then my comments should be ignored.
