[address-policy-wg] status of 2011-02

Hello,

I am sorry, I should say that some people definitely misinterpreted my
words.

And probably not only mines

I definitely declared that I still think that no concensus was reached.

I am not sure that I want to spend time to fill a formal appeal, however,
may be.

Thanks for your considerations,

Géza


On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Immo 'FaUl' Wehrenberg <immo.ripe at be.free.de
> wrote:

> Gert wrote:
> > Looking at all the messages that have been posted in the discussions
> > following my e-mails, I categorize your feedback as follows:
> [...]
> >  - statements of "we do not have consensus"
> >      (Immo Wehrenberg, on the assumption that consensus has to be
> unanimous
> >       Remco Van Mook)
>
> I'm afraid I have to correct you here. I said that I'm not sure wether we
> have
> consensous or not and i would follow Gezas opinion on that. Since Geza has
> not
> objected that consensous is reached, I assume that we have consensous now.
>
> Just a clarification, sorry that I did not make this clear in the first
> place.
>
> Immo
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20120105/a8df65d9/attachment.html>