Hi,
Uh. Can you please be a bit more explicit, as not everybody might remember
On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 02:54:59PM +0200, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Dan Luedtke <maildanrl@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > <provoking>I don't see how anyone can be against this proposal.</provoking>
>
> I don't see the real world benefit of the proposal, there are insufficient
> arguments for it, and I'm therefore with Tore on this one.
>
> (So now you perhaps see how anyone _can_ be against it.)
Tore's stance on this?
I take it that you are opposing the proposal? Any variant of the proposal,
or would you support the "publish, but anonymize rejected transfers" option?
It's a bit hard for the chairs to figure out which way to go if opinions
are not stated clearly...