[council] attending to content and consensus
While there is some significance to the fact that Milton chose to resort to
his usual, ad hominem mode, let's try to focus on substance.
>* The NCDNHC has expressed solid support for
>the principles underlying the current agreement.
>We are probably the only constituency that has
>had a vote on this, and it was passed in MdR
(I assume that Milton meant "underlying the current proposal" rather than
Milton's statements are quite simply false. The working group agreed to
Sponsored,Restricted. There has been no consensus established concerning
the new constraints.
The potential problems with S,R were raised in the constituency, long ago,
but the constituency chose to ignore those concerns.
As to the points I included in my previous note, there has been no
discussion of it, or equivalent, issues. And there certainly has been
absolutely no development of consensus, much less any effort to assess it.
Milton is free to try to provide substantiation of his claim about
consensus. Perhaps his resorting to attack mode is because he knows he
will not succeed.
Dave Crocker <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464