On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 11:13:00AM +0200, Frank K?ster wrote: > Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 08:17:17AM +0200, Frank K?ster wrote: > >> Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote: > >> > On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 12:18:33PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > >> >> On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 16:17:05 +0100, Ian Jackson > >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > >> >> > Perhaps it would be better if the policy maintainer were someone who > >> >> > was more willing to listen and take on board comments ? > >> >> This sounds like a canard. What official Board comments have > >> >> been disregarded by the current set of policy maintainers? Or do you > >> >> mean "Ian wants a Yes Man"? > >> > Ian meant "take comments under consideration", not "listen to comments > >> > from the technical committee". > >> Manoj sometimes gives the impression of not listening [...] > > Err, I mean Ian meant "(take on board) (comments)", and Manoj appears to > > have misinterpreted that as "(take on) (Board comments)". Nothing more. > I'm not familiar with the expression "take on board", but according to > dict.leo.org you are still asserting that he does not take into > consideration comments by others. I repeat what I wrote:
I'm asserting nothing of the kind. Ian might be, but I'm not. Cheers, aj
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
