Common understanding is completely subjective. In this specific case there is a very clear problem (recognized by the documents already sent today by Mirjam), which is no formal definition who must self-recuse. Not to mention the others that I've mention.
Even if only me see those problems (which again is not the case, according to WGCC summary), still there is a chance that with the discussion of the proposal others support it and we can find a point where objections are invalid. This is what consensus mean. We all know that "objectors" usually "speak up more and louder". Most of the people that agree, tend to stay silent. It is very unfortunate, but is the way it is. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 9/2/21 13:39, "Gert Doering" <[email protected]> escribió: Hi, On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 01:31:02PM +0100, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ripe-list wrote: > Then, no doubts, never any of my proposals (including the one sent to the list a couple of days ago), has lacked a clear problem statement. Well, you missed the part about "common understanding about the problem statement *before* hitting people with a wall of text". And no, as you can see from the reactions, what might be clear to you is far from clear to the receivers. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
