Just in case it isn't clear, I'm making this offer to point out the absurdity of The Mittani's central premise, that he needs to be chairman in order for the CSM to be effective. This is nonsense; the chairmanship has no real power. The Mittani is an effective member of the CSM because he works hard and is a persuasive advocate, not because he's chairman.
So, are you saying the CSM6 would have obtained the same results if The Mittani was not chairman? If you pick the quietest of current CSM members and he/she were chairperson, would the results of the past year still be the same? Would the other CSM members agree with you?
ReplyDeleteYes, that's exactly what I'm saying. He would have had the same influence, and the same results.
Delete