Hi, Op 25 jul. 2013, om 21:55 heeft Jan Ingvoldstad <frettled@gmail.com> het volgende geschreven:
I'm bewildered, confuzzled, and wide-eyed, yes, nearly astonished, that Tore's points don't seem to penetrate the fog.
I've read this proposal a few times, and as far as I can tell, most if not all of the alleged counterpoints to 2013-03 are _not_ counterpoints to 2013-03, but to something else.
I may have misread the proposal, and therefore I request that Filiz, Michele and Nick please point out exactly which points _introduced_ or _altered_ with 2013-03 they disagree with, so that I, and other confused people, can have a better chance of understanding your arguments.
As chair I can only agree to this. There is a lot of discussion going on, which is a good thing: it shows that the community (which includes all of you) actually cares about this and is involved in the decision making process. This makes chairs happy :-) But I have seen lots of cases where Tore asks people to point out which part of his policy proposal causes concern, and I haven't seen any answers to that. This makes an honest discussion about 2013-03 very difficult. I realise that there are many things in the current policies that people might want to change, but trying to put everything into one policy proposal doesn't work. If you have concerns that are not directly caused by the changes that 2013-03 proposes then please discuss them in a separate thread (and change the subject line accordingly please) and we can turn them into separate policy proposals if necessary. So for the sake of an open, transparent and honest discussion about 2013-03 please include references to existing policy that is removed by 2013-03 or to specific sections of 2013-03 itself. When a need for improvement is identified providing suggestions for text would of course also be appreciated. Thank you, Sander Steffann APWG co-chair