Re: A suggestion regarding status change Re: Motion P1788/0023.01:NoMidRad -- VOTING PERIOD BEGINS
> Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 09:06:35 +0200
> From: Arnold Neumaier <Arnold.Neumaier@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "R. Baker Kearfott" <rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Nate Hayes <nh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, owner-stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
> stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: A suggestion regarding status change Re: Motion P1788/0023.01:NoMidRad -- VOTING PERIOD BEGINS
>
> R. Baker Kearfott wrote:
> >
> > I suggest the following:
> >
> > 1. Arnold Neumaier (through Dan Zuras) formally withdraws Motion 23.
>
> I did not move the motion, hence cannot withdraw it.
>
> Starting from the Vienna proposal and including the present case,
> functioning as an advisor but non-member, I only propose formulations
> of content and rationales.
>
> It is up to the regular members of P1788 to do with these formulations
> what they find appropriate,
>
>
> Arnold Neumaier
Many have complained about how slow things are going
in this group. While it is going faster than you think,
that perception is caused by delaying the hard decisions.
This question is a hard one that is at the root of much
of the arguments in this group.
The standard shall not support a midrad interval
format or nonstandard intervals, beyond providing
conversion support, approximately to the extent
specified in the Vienna Proposal.
It is a stark choice but one that is better made sooner
than later. I don't know what the correct answer is but
you (collectively) do. And I know it is better to lay
your cards on the table now than to raise the stakes
until many of you are hurt by the result.
Now is the time to choose.
I ask that you think long & hard about it & vote.
I know that all of you have an opinion about this so I
doubt not making a quorum will be a problem this time. :-)
This is your first hard choice.
Make it.
Dan