On Sep 14, 2016, at 4:56 AM, Tim Bruijnzeels <t...@ripe.net> wrote:
> I understand that this is the opinion of the authors. I still disagree. A
> weaker word such as "unwanted" or "anomalous" can also be used - it is less
> likely to confuse a reader, and can be equally clarified in the introduction.
> Again, let the chairs note that I cannot support the term "adverse" and take
> it from there.
I have no view on this matter either way, but am seeking clarity on your
to the term “adverse” in the document - is it with regard to simply the
title of the
document, or also with regard to the usage of the term in text of the
itself? (the former would represent a minor change, whereas the latter
require more a significant change to resolve.)
p.s. my views alone - not necessarily even worth the electrons used in transport
sidr mailing list