> And is that because members of the "larger" community were not allowed to > participate in those WGs whose decisions adversely impacted their interests?
I've certainly seen such participation discouraged, and the contributions of "outside" participants dismissed as irrelevant, by even working group chairs. I've also seen working groups drastically exceed, and in some cases ignore, charters which were designed to limit the harm they could do. And your argument is a fallacy. The workings of special interest groups can and often do have a significant effect on the general population, but nobody can afford the time and energy it takes to keep track of every special interest group that might affect him. Keith
