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

[Adam Roach <[e-mail]>]

On 12/6/14 19:41, David Singer wrote:
> Adam
>
> we are at cross purposes.  I am complaining about a language usage.  When you say “both camps support” you imply (a) that there are only two camps, and everyone is a member of one or other and (b) that they have reached agreement — and therefore we are done. Perhaps you don’t mean it, but it’s a technique some people use to try to give the appearance of an agreement, and given the sensitive nature of the subject, I’d prefer you not do that.
>
> If you say “there was support for the position from several camps”, or somesuch, that would be fine. That leaves room for people to say that they dissent, that’s all.
>
> Got it?

Is this the colloquial use of the word "you" to mean "one"? As in "when 
one says 'both camps support'"?

Or are you making a claim that *I* used the phrase "both camps support" 
or something equivalent?

I think if you go looking for something you could quote directly, 
anything that I've said on the topic is far more nuanced than that. But 
I suspect you already know that, since you oddly chose not to quote me 
at all: it's easier to apply a strawman logical fallacy to parody my 
position if you don't provide contrary evidence at the same time.

/a