Ed Lazowska's response:


Regarding the self-assessment:  I personally would love to see this made
part of the official process, assuming that students are in favor of it.
"Introspection" and "stimulating discussions with advisors" were exactly the
rationale for it.  (Analogously, the fact that the students at the
department retreat thought that the "list of who'd been in the program how
long" was a good idea weighed heavily in the decision to do it.)
 
Regarding departmental decision-making:  We'll work much harder on
communication regarding recruiting.  Hank and Paul will do a building
meeting.  (I already sent mail about this.)  A key point is that if any
student has any question at all about any decision or any process, the right
thing to do is ask your advisor, or ask me, immediately.  Don't sit around
wondering -- ask.  Despite any and all attempts to communicate, there are
going to be gaps, and black thoughts fill a vacuum.  Please ask questions!
 
Lunch with me:  Hey, sure.  We stopped it after the time when it was just me
and one other person.
 
Lab issues:  I'd like to be sure to note that Erik has begun a practice of
meeting quarterly with a group of grad student leaders regarding lab issues.
This happened earlier this quarter, and "minutes" were posted to cs-grads.
So there is a regular communication path regarding computing issues; please
be sure to use it.  (This mechanism is a replacement for the "lab policy
committee"; I checked with Zack and others over the summer, and it was clear
that LPC wasn't working for students (among others); we concluded that
quarterly scheduled meetings were likely to be an improvement.)