On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 06:07:33AM -0500, Edward Lewis wrote:
At 11:57 +0100 11/13/08, Peter Koch wrote:
support, with another dissenting individual, who would still not oppose the text going forward as a WG statement.
Assuming I'm the dissenting individual - I had a talk with Jim yesterday. My comments were strictly related to the words used and how they might be interpreted, not the point being made. I.e., no substantive argument. In the sense that editing anything means a new cycle of review, rewording for clarification would mean that there'd be no time for vetting, etc., and still get this to the NTIA in time - you can say that I agree with the message being sent (if not the exact words).
I didn't have time last evening to email about this conversation with Jim. -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edward Lewis +1-571-434-5468
you flatter yourself :) I beleive I was the disenting individual. and for the record, NTIA is still interested in other views, so either find folks who share your views and respond to the NOI or send in your individual concerns. DoC would be pleased to be inundated w/ responses. :) --bill