I am in favour of asynchronous methods as well, although Greg’s point did make me think about that: "The problem is that - since I wasn’t present for the full discussion - I don’t think I should get a chance to object. This does allow broader participation but unless people read all the emails — and the discussion is held entirely by email — a person objecting is objecting with out participating fully in the discussion.” However, I think that is covered in point 3.2: "If objections are received but the chairs believe the objections have already been considered and addressed and there is an overall consensus, the draft decision becomes a formal decision of the Working Group with objections. Objections are recorded as an appendix to the formal decision.” It would be nice for the chairs to politely point the un-informed objector to the relevant discussion if that wan’t in the original call for consensus (especially as the sources can be more widespread), but overall it seems covered. Kind regards, -Alastair
Received on Friday, 15 May 2015 08:53:54 UTC