[rpd] End of LAST call (was Re: RPD Digest ...)

[Noah]

On Fri, 31 Jan 2020, 00:17 Mike Silber, <silber.mike at gmail.com> wrote:


> PLEASE edit the subject line if you are responding to to a digest thread.

>

> Thanks for your comment Fernando.

>

> I think it is far more difficult than you explain and even less likely to

> happen.

>

> That being said - the objection was raised before, without any

> justification. A number of us asked the writers to please substantiate

> their objection and explain their purported risk. The writers failed to

> provide any justification for their view.

>

> Simply repeating an unsubstantiated and frankly unsustainable objection

> does not make it valid.

>

> Given there is no technical or legal justification provided, I think the

> objection can be disregard as unsubstantiated.

>



Indeed, repeating, rephrasing an unsubstantial  objection never make it
valid. We have been struggling to get this obvious and common sense truth
acceptable here for a while.

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20200131/1bd92890/attachment-0001.html>