Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Input requested - Policy & Implementation Working Definitions

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

On 22-Jan-14 17:06, Michael Graham wrote:
> Finally, at the risk of repeating myself and the introduction to the
> definitions, I want to repeat that the definition sub-team’s goal is to
> arrive at definitions for specific terms which enables the Work Group to
> discuss the matters before it without debating the meaning or
> significance of those terms.  By doing so, we hope the Working Group’s
> deliberations will be able to focus on fulfilling the Charter requests
> and produce the deliverables requested, among which we anticipate will
> be further elucidations of and discussions concerning these terms and
> their significance to Policy and Implementation.
I guess I do not understand how we do this.

By picking a certain definition we are making certain solution more 
acceptable than others.
Deciding on a definition presages the solution.  And if the definition 
does not fit we will need to add adjectives before the defined words or 
use substitute language to actually have an open conversation order.
But, I will work on my view of the definitions to send by the deadline, 
because we can move the conversation into the definition if that is what 
the groups has decided is the best way to proceed.  I missed the first 
few weeks of this group due to other obligations, so am forced to accept 
to the process by which we seem to moving.
avri

ps. my degrees are in Philosophy where we leanr that once the definition 
is set, the conversation is mostly over.