Re: [rtcweb] confirming sense of the room: mti codec

Adam Roach <> Sat, 06 December 2014 01:05 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64FBE1A8773 for <>; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 17:05:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pf56hW9uVzp8 for <>; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 17:05:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD3471A876A for <>; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 17:05:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Orochi.local ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.9/8.14.7) with ESMTP id sB6154eJ062673 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 5 Dec 2014 19:05:05 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from
X-Authentication-Warning: Host [] claimed to be Orochi.local
Message-ID: <>
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 17:05:00 -0800
From: Adam Roach <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <>, Sean Turner <>, "" <>
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040508010306020608040505"
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] confirming sense of the room: mti codec
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2014 01:05:12 -0000

On 12/5/14 11:59, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote:
> In that case you are agreeing with something that did not happen. By no stretch of the imagination can the result of the RTCWEB session be declared as "consensus".

I guess I should have picked up from the other thread that it's pedantry 
hour. I'll play one round on-list.

The common English definition I'm familiar with for "consensus" is the 
one described by Merriam-Webster online 1b: " the judgment arrived at by 
most of those concerned."

I recognize that in the game of pedantry, this is simply moving my pawn 
out from its starting ranks at the beginning of the tournament. If you'd 
like to continue the match by, say, quibbling over the meaning of "most" 
in that context, please call me on +1 650 903 0800, extension 863. I'm 
sure this is neither topical for this list, nor of interest to its 
members, and I suspect we can conclude the matter much more quickly in