On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Jan Ingvoldstad <frettled@gmail.com> wrote:
I think your suggestion for going forward is constructive, and will probably mitigate the risk you highlighted from the impact analysis.
Personally, I feel that point 3) smells a bit like fluff. It's well-known that changes can be proposed and implemented given community support. Stating that in the notes on the process of such a change seems superfluous. Along similar lines, ensuring overall fairness is an oft-stated, and obvious, goal. Pointing it out again in the spirit of consensus can't hurt, either.
I don't know what the proper procedure would be for handling this, but you've got my support.
Ideally, Malcolm or you would start a new PDP to implement the changes you want to see. -- Richard