[alac] Non-consensus (was Re: IDN document, draft 5)
Erick Iriarte Ahon ha scritto: Hi Vittorio I've dropped the issue from my radar for the moment, as simply I don't have time. But I have a higher level question for the Committee: how do we want to solve cases in which clearly some ALAC members strongly think that X is good and other strongly think that X is bad? We have the following options: a) we drop issues on which we don't agree, and we only state those on which all members agree (which might save some clashes, but lead us not to ever stating anything non-obvious); b) we mention both positions and arguments in favour of each of them; c) we start to vote on these issues. What do you prefer? Until now we've never been voting on "content", but it might be the moment to start. On the other hand, perhaps b) would be a better compromise, at least in cases where we're not forced to say a plain "yes" or "no". I don't like a) at all. -- vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<------ http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Vecchio sito, nuovo toblòg...
|