Imho, if you want something not to succeed, there is a very easy way: pinn yourself down on the details. The details will follow from the big lines, and if there are no big lines yet, it is not veyr useful to start with the details. And the "mere" was compared with the main question imho, at which I hear nothing almost, what exactly the purpose would be.
BR, lodewijk
2008/1/5, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com:
On 05/01/2008, effe iets anders effeietsanders@gmail.com wrote:
Guys, please,
The language is just a mere practical matter. Please let's first come to the conclusion what the *purpose* would be of this meta-arbcom *before* we even start with discussing issues like this. i know it is very easy to get into details, but let's remain focussed. Does anyone have a good proposal for which topics the arbcom should be used and what type of members we would need?
It's a practical matter, but I don't think it's a "mere" one. It is a very important issue that needs to be resolved. What kind of cases the committee will consider is also an important issue, but there's no reason we can't discuss them both.