[address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Cleanup)

Hi,

On 24/09/2013 20:05, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
> On what possible grounds do you assume that our "+1" supports are EASY?

Because it's so short to write and not develop  :-)

+1 and you're done here.

-1 requires long developments and a lot of repetition, as you may
   have noticed.

But it is the game, OK, support is easier to formulate. This comes
from the system of someone writing a proposal and this is a "positive"
move, so going the counterway requires more writing (and may might seem
counter-productive) while going the same direction obviously does not
require to re-write the "pro" arguments that are already in the proposal.

This is where I regret by the way, the assymetry between supporting and
opposing arguments in the rationale.


> You imply that only you have thought this through, and that those who just
> state that they agree have not.
> I find this unnecessarly offensive, that you cannot state your arguments
> without making such implication.

OK I must admit this is was bit rude, so please accept my apologies.
But this was not intedned as personal offense, I appreciate when I am
on the other side an just need to say +1  :-)

Best regards,
Sylvain