Re: [idn] draft about Tradition and Simplified Chinese Conversion[version01]

["James Seng/Personal" <jseng@pobox.org.sg>]

> The co-chairs of IDN have more than enough to do, with the limited
means
> they have, without attempting to also perform some opportunistic
function
> of the External Liaison, even at the request of document editors, who
are
> themselves no doubt acting in good faith.
>
> The statement "the wg need a statement from JET" is "true" if the WG
chairs
> find that rough consensus exists to require some statement.

Two clarification:

1. I never claim "the wg need a statement from JET" nor have said
   anything to that respect in my capacity as a co-chair. Please go
   back and read my mail (which I have clarify I have wrote as an
   "argumentive idiot" of the wg).

2. I am not performing any liaison activities as co-chair of IDN to
   JET or otherwise. This co-chair happened to be a member of JET too.

It appears I have to repeat myself twice for every mail I send out, the
second mail to to clarify in response to you twisting my words to mean
more than what it say. IMHO, it is a waste of bandwidth which adds no
further technical discussion to the group.

Therefore, this shall be the last time I shall repeat myself. From now
on, lack of clarification on my part to your interpretion of my mail
does not indictate any agreement of my part on your interpretion. I hope
others will do so likewise so we can all save more bandwidth to do more
useful work.

-James Seng