Re: Draft GR for permitting private discussion
Michael Gilbert <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> I don't think infeasible or unconstructive are the best qualifiers.
> Unconstructive discussions are not necessarily bad since they can easily
> be ignored. I'm hard pressed to come up with an infeasible case (except
> perhaps when one does not have the ability to send mail over the
Counterproductive, perhaps? That's the best word that I can come up with
to capture my concern, which is that forcing some of these discussions to
be public would make the underlying problem considerably worse.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>