The one minor thing that bothers me in both is the statement "One outcome of
that retreat is that the topic has caught the attention of the central
administration at MIT". That the topic has caught Academic Council's interest
is clear, but I don't think this is solely attributable to the EECS retreat as
your drafts imply. For example, I remember much the same kind of excitement
emerging from Bill Mitchell's presentation to Academic Council last year on
the Studio of the Future, which certainly has attracted central-administration
attention, and of course numerous projects in the Media Lab and various
chemistry-related departments have had similar impact. (I also think, of
course, that our own modest IS efforts in collaboration with numerous faculty
in numerous departments over the past few months have helped make this issue
visible and attention-catching, but here I have clear prejudice.)
As I say, this is a minor point, yet a modest rewording to something like "one
outcome of this retreat, and of parallel initiatives elsewhere across MIT, is
that the topic has caught ...". This preserves the meaning, but defuses most
political difficulty that the current wording might cause. But I'll also be
quite content if the letters go as you drafted them.
gj
e40-359a/MIT/Cambridge MA 02139
voice: (617) 253-3712
fax: (617) 258-8736
url: http://web.mit.edu/afs/athena/user/g/j/gjackson/www/home.html