On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 4:55 AM Stephen J. Turnbull <stephenjturnbull@gmail.com> wrote:
But the "good idea" of general deferreds is only marginally relevant to our -1s. It's those -1s that constitute the main issue for Chris, since they're a noisy signal that the SC might think as we do.
Please explain to me *exactly* what your arguments against the current proposal are. At the moment, I am extremely confused as to what people actually object to, and there's endless mischaracterization and accusation happening. Can we actually figure out what people are really saying, and what the problems with this proposal are? NOT that there might potentially be some other proposal, but what the problems with this one are. Argue THIS proposal, not hypothetical other proposals. ChrisA