On 17.02.2020 0:57, Mark Wielaard wrote:
Yes, I see how that formulation is too strong and might be read like
that. I hadn't realized how it sounded. Thanks for pointing that out. I
have updated it to say that "The process followed by this initiative is
not supported by...".

Is there a place where I can look at the new phrasing?

Which I hope sounds more neutral and better
describes the core of the disagreement.

It sounds marginally better, but it doesn't address the core of my comment. Sounds like you're still saying that it's only Richard who does not support it. But all the rest of GNU do. Or are supposed to, for some reason.

And the latter implication is one of the reasons you're seeing all these negative responses.

Reply via email to