Sean Whitton <[email protected]> writes: > While I stand by my GR in principle, I agree with those who have said > that it is not worth spending time on something like this unless it's > going to pass without opposition. Since this GR /has/ turned out to be > quite controversial, I hereby withdraw it.
I support your interest in bringing the topic for discussion; I agree that the unfortunate inference you described can be reasonably read in the text of SC §3. While I agree with your decision to withdraw the GR, for reasons others have expressed well, the discussion was short and useful. We need not only GRs that pass without opposition; we can learn from even controversial GR proposals, though as you point out they might quickly become damaging, also. So, thank you for starting this, and for finishing it gracefully. Also: welcome to the project! -- \ “You can never entirely stop being what you once were. That's | `\ why it's important to be the right person today, and not put it | _o__) off until tomorrow.” —Larry Wall | Ben Finney
