Re: Issue 100 Zero-Edits Counter Proposal

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Shelley Powers <> wrote:
> Amicable resolution is based on mutually agreed upon course of action
> that evolves naturally, not one person telling the other to do
> something, disregarding the previous communications. For instance, in
> Issue 92, you had a comment about the table footer in the example, and
> I made a change.

That's precisely the spirit in which that comment was intended.  I'm
sorry you read a different intention from it.  It would be silly of me
to try to *command* anyone to do anything in this working group.  We
operate over the internet, after all; how could I possibly force you
to do anything?

> I believe I will, and the best way to do so is to stop responding to
> your emails. I'll restrict my  communications to you specifically to
> proposals and counter-proposals. I'm sure that this would be a course
> the co-chairs would recommend, and other team members would
> appreciate.

I think that ignoring someone's emails is counterproductive to the
smooth operation of this Working Group.  Further, I think that trying
to limit anything at all to the Change/Counter Proposal process is
counterproductive, as these are very nearly *endpoints*, and ones that
generate an astonishing and annoying amount of bureaucracy.  Nearly
any possible action that can prevent something from reaching the point
of Change/Counter Proposals is a good thing, and nearly anything that
encourages more things escalating to Issues and requiring
Change/Counter Proposals is bad.

So, my personal view is that this would be a bad move on your part.
To make myself absolutely clear, I'm not ordering you to pay attention
to my emails.  You may do as you wish, as always.  I'm merely
suggesting what I feel would be a more productive move for the Working
Group as a whole.  I believe that everyone paying attention to
everyone's emails would result in the quickest and most productive


Received on Thursday, 15 April 2010 00:51:47 UTC