No, maybe my English is not as good as I thought it was :-)-O. I mean
the drafting team must take the MTX consensus as a base (of departure)
and write up a draft along those lines.
In other words we can not do something that would be contrary to the
MTX consensus (unless there are compelling reasons and clear
consensus).
> In effect, are you saying that the mandate was to change the MTY
> consensus by adding new proposals from other sources, and submit
> that changed draft to the membership? I don't remember that
> mandate. Perhaps my memory is unclear.
No. I don't mean that.
> I understood that the mandate was simply for the drafting team to
> collate all the new consensuses from Monterret, post for comments,
> and then take a vote.
That is exactly what I mean. Ah, the native speaker :-)-O
But that is not what we are doing, are we?
> Beyond that, if we want to open up the DNSO.org draft to outside
> sources, as we seem to be doing, it should be done fairly, and not
> by just adding INTA proposals. Don't you think?
100%, you know my position, I want an open, neutral transparent and
fair DNSO.
greetings, el