Re: Last minute cominbations G+D and/or G+E
Guillem Jover writes ("Re: Last minute cominbations G+D and/or G+E"):
> On Wed, 2019-12-04 at 17:11:49 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > I do not intend either of these proposals to replace E or D, nor G.
>
> Hmm, I've not checked the actual differences between the combined and
> the individual options, but I have the feeling they would kind of
> devalue G, as it would seem like it's missing something.
That is an unfortunate effect, yes. I mean, my opinion is (as you
know) that G _is_ missing something. But it would be much better if
you as the proposer of the original G could explain in it why you
think more guidance is not appropriate.
> I acknowledge
> some people do believe it does miss something, but placed side-by-side
> in this way, makes it weird. I guess I'd then need to try to articulate
> the guidance and details (or lack thereof) in some explicit way to
> append to the end on an amendment.
Yes. I have no idea how long you have to do this.
Ian.
--
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
Reply to: