Scott James Remnant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Do you believe that the tech-ctte should be relatively inactive? Or do > you believe that an inactive Technical Committee is a bad thing?
I don't think it would be a bad thing for the technical committee to be more active, but I don't think that's their fault. To some extent, we seem to have got better at reaching technical consensus without needing to involve the technical committee, and I think that's a good thing. > If the latter, do you propose (as they would be your delegates) to make > any changes to the current make-up of the committee. There doesn't seem to be any obvious reason to change the current committee. If people feel that they make bad decisions, then that might change. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
