On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 11:22:42AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote: > > Thanks for clarifying that. > > Your wit is razor sharp as usual, Branden. What you seem to be implying is > that there is something wrong with the desire to preserve the way things > are now (regardless of the motivation). Is this your position?
I'm not speaking for Branden, but I don't think that "keeping things the way they are for its own sake" is a compelling argument. The status quo is rooted in odd compromises of 1997, not relevant today. I don't believe that there is any reason to insist that it must always be as it was in 1997. Let's talk about the two options -- the 1997 draft and the 2002 draft -- on their merits. -- John
