Re: A position paper

[Bob Helfant <bhelfant@globecomm.net>]

Whether or not the rough concensus is for or against all or some of the
proposal is currently a matter of opinion until we put it to a formal vote.
 Some people say that the discussion group has found the proposal to be
good and others after reading the same mail came to the conclusion that
most people on the list do not support it.  I suggest sending out a form
with a place for a Yes or No for each section.  Then we will have real data.

Bob


At 06:55 PM 12/27/96 -0800, Darrell Greenwood wrote:
>At 3:11 PM +0000 12/27/96, Jeff Williams wrote:
>
> >   Well, this is a matter of opinion.  most on this list do not agree
> > that it is an execellent perposal.  Most of the comment that has been
> > posted here has found very little of it reasonable or truely
> > enforcable.
>
>Sorry, I must disagree with your comment. My perception is completely
>contrary to yours.
>
>The IAHC draft is an excellent proposal by an accomplished team of
>professionals, showing excellent judgement under difficult
>conditions, and the proposal is well on its way to achieving a rough
>consensus. It will be adjusted appropriately in light of the
>comments, I am sure.
>
>A few are attempting to flood this list with repetitive negative
>comments. It does not follow that their comments are more correct,
>useful or informed because of their repetition.
>
>A good or reasoned point only has to be posted once. An invalid or
>selfish point gains nothing by constant repetition or threats, it
>only creates noise.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Darrell
>
>
>
>--
>Darrell Greenwood, Vancouver, BC   darrell_greenwood@mindlink.net
>My web homepage...    http://mindlink.net/darrell_greenwood/
>
>