On Jan 22, 2010, at 5:53 PM, Avi Lior wrote:
I think that the participants in this discussion are effectively at an impasse, that is to say they are talking past each other, attempting to make and re-make their points without actually listening to others. That causes patience to fray and the tone to become "edgy". Let's try to dial this down a little.
I think there may be multiple agendas to "protect" something, and as is sadly too often the case in standards body debates, the purpose of the debate is to "win", not to edify.
I see no evidence that the chairs or AD are *happy* about this. Bernard has already issued a tongue-in-cheek remark about the "frankness" of the discussion. That was a polite hint.
Exactly why are you attempting to drag poor Glen into this debate? :-)