On 30/11/2004 16:42, Peter Kirk wrote:
...
... I do wish to shed bad light on your decision on one particular item, because I consider that item to be technically incorrect. ...
I should have written:
I do wish to shed bad light on the UTC's and WG2's decision on one particular item, because I consider that decision to be technically incorrect.
I didn't mean this to be ad hominem at all, or even ad comitetem or whatever the Latin would be for "to the committee". Technical disagreement on one item is not discredit. In general the UTC's and WG2's work is excellent. But the point of ballotting processes and other checks and balances is to further perfect their work by giving others the chance to find and probe its weak points. Some of those weak points have been highlighted by the negative votes on the WG2 amendment. I am sure that the UTC and WG2 will take them into account and perfect their work.
-- Peter Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) http://www.qaya.org/
