RE: [ws-tx] Avoiding motions on text drafted during telcons

["Colleen Evans" <coevans@microsoft.com>]

Our course - it's RRO ;-).

I'm simply proposing we avoid on the spot decisions about substantially
reworded text without the benefit of time to consider the full impact.  

Colleen 


-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Chapman [mailto:martin.chapman@oracle.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 10:55 AM
To: Colleen Evans; ws-tx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ws-tx] Avoiding motions on text drafted during telcons

opps replied to wrong mail
jet lag arghhhhhh

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Martin Chapman [mailto:martin.chapman@oracle.com] 
>Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 5:47 PM
>To: 'Colleen Evans'; ws-tx@lists.oasis-open.org
>Subject: RE: [ws-tx] NEW Issue: WS-C: Clarify normative 
>requirements for MU attribute.
>
>
>I have to strongly disagree. If anyone is uncomfortable with a 
>motion they can ask for it to be tabled (US style), vote 
>against etc etc. A blanket ban on such motions is harmful and 
>may come back to bite us in an unmentionable place, as will 
>inventing process where no invention is required. 
>
>In this particular case as well, we did have a concrete 
>proposal and  it didn't involve pages of text either; 
>it was well manageable for a con call, especially with irc support.
>
>
>Martin.
>