Re: workprocess - default process comments

[Terry Allen <tallen@sonic.net>]

One other item, the requirement to justify a negative vote.  I was
victimized by this requirement in Rosetta Net, and deplore it.
While the reason for the ISO requirement that Jon related is
fine - gather items for the next revision - it doesn't apply
to all cases (as when there's been a long discussion already on
the record, with good documentation, or when someone votes no
on some general ground).  In RN, the requirement was to document
your negative vote in only a few working days.  This was burdensome
when I had a tight schedule already, and I felt it deterred people
from voting no.

I would prefer to *allow* justification of a negative vote, for
the record and for consideration in future revisions, but not to
*require* it.

regards, Terry