Hi Alissa,
At 02:22 PM 07-08-2020, Alissa Cooper wrote:
Actually I'd like to suggest something different before anyone else
responds, and that is to put this thread and the other related
threads to the side for now. We had a productive if short discussion
of draft-knodel-terminology-03 in the GENDISPATCH session last week.
The authors have some action items, and there is likely to be
further discussion of this topic at a future GENDISPATCH interim. As
I said at the mic during the session, email discussion on this topic
does not seem to be helping the discussion progress. Let's give it a
rest and those interested in the topic can reconvene when the
GENDISPATCH interim gets scheduled.
There was a practice to confirm working group decisions on the
mailing list. I could not find any message pertaining to that in the
relevant mailing list archives. What are the actions items?
I read a blog post published by the Center of Democracy and
Technology about the draft. Prior to that, I asked whether the draft
was about etymology and the response was that it was about
"power". I could not find that listed as an objective or
non-objective in the slides.
Would the email discussion be better if it was structured and managed?
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
