On 02/11/2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>> Then you shouldn't say you speak with "one voice" because that implies > >>> unanimity which is not the case here. You should say "the majority of > >>> the OGB feels X way." > >> > >> That is not how abstentions are generally counted. > > > > Well, sorry, but for those not used the extreme level of bureaucracy > > (which isn't your fault) surrounding this project. Can you please use > > "laymen's terms"? Seriously. Otherwise, you're going to be implying > > things you don't mean to because people don't take the same meaning from > > your wording. > > > Abstention is a removal of oneself from a process, generally due to a > serious conflict of interest (generally, an inability to provide an > unbiased response) of one sort or another. > > Proper consideration of the OGB's position on an issue should actually be > consideration of all the members of the OGB who have not abstained from > discussion. The full set minus abstentions. > > It sounds like the OGB is being rather consistent.
Consistent and understandable to people not used to layers of bureaucracy are two different things. All I'm asking for is to be approachable and clear in communication. What I get instead is a torrent emails repeating some lame dictionary definitions many people probably aren't familiar with. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
