Danny O'Brien wrote: > > My reading of the heartbeat cFc was that it is for procedural > objections > regarding the publication of the heartbeat itself (ie no draft > appeared), not substantive critiques of the content, nor to the > existence of the draft itself. > > If anyone other than Fred thinks that this isn't the case, do let me > know.
Mr. O'Brien, I'm sure that we likely do not agree on much around this particular topic, but here I do fully agree with you. JF
