Hi!
> I disagree that (as I take away from your last sentence) the current
> approach is better because it means people feel they have been properly
> heard. I can think of recent messages on the list from people saying
> that they don't feel heard.
I'm not saying we have perfect record in getti
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 4:31 PM Peter Bowyer
wrote:
> Hi Stas,
>
> Thanks for replying!
>
> On Sun, 11 Aug 2019 at 04:26, Stanislav Malyshev
> wrote:
>
> > The risk here however is for the document to be seen as a means to
> > "argue less" by way of excluding certain points of view from discussi
Hi Stas,
Thanks for replying!
On Sun, 11 Aug 2019 at 04:26, Stanislav Malyshev
wrote:
> The risk here however is for the document to be seen as a means to
> "argue less" by way of excluding certain points of view from discussion.
> That would not be a good thing. This is the main concern for co
Hi!
> I started for the same reason: to help the community pull together and
> argue less, by having a codified set of values.
The risk here however is for the document to be seen as a means to
"argue less" by way of excluding certain points of view from discussion.
That would not be a good thing
