Re: [tcpinc] Consensus call: questions posed at the Berlin session

[Kyle Rose <[e-mail]>]

What I'm looking for is substantive dissent from what was decided in the
room, such that rough consensus is called into question, and to save folks
the effort of responding if they are in agreement with what was
provisionally decided at the meeting.

But you (or anyone else) should absolutely feel free to post a response
even if you were in attendance.

I think this is in the spirit of "conduct business on the mailing list"
because the questions are still open until we've either confirmed or
overturned rough consensus on each.

Thanks,
Kyle

On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[e-mail]
> wrote:

> On Mon 2016-07-25 07:29:23 -0400, Kyle Rose wrote:
> > Here is a list of questions posed at the Berlin session, along with the
> > rough consensus established among those in the room. Please respond to
> each
> > by number if you were not in attendance and have an opinion, especially
> if
> > that differs from the meeting consensus, indicated by a * after each
> > question.
>
> Does this mean that the chairs do not want e-mailed responses from
> people who were in attendance?
>
>      --dkg
>