Re: [council] Proposed simplified WHOIS motion for 20 July 2006

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

On 19 jul 2006, at 12.43, Marilyn Cade wrote:

> My question is : Is Bruce's interpretation, now in the said  
> PowerPoint the
> agreed position of the Council?
>
> You can imagine that given my Constituency's interests, views, and  
> needs,
> that we want and support a broader interpretation. However, I  
> respect that
> it is important to have agreement with other Councilors and achieve  
> as much
> agreement on what is meant and supporter, or not, as possible.
>
> For example, members of the GAC saw the PowerPoint and may view the
> interpretation, since it had the chair's name and title on it, as  
> Council
> perspective.

It was broader then my understanding and that is the reason I sent my  
note to this list quibbling with that as the interpretation of the  
agreed upon purpose.  I took Bruce's message as an statement of what  
he, and perhaps his constituency, took to be the implications of the  
language.  But I was concerned that this would become a blessed  
interpretation of the language, as comforting as it might be to some.
Personally I think the words should stand as proposed and voted upon,  
as that is the nature of agreed language.   Language is always  
interpretable and I believe one must use the agreed language without  
further official interpretation.  Interpretation must be done as part  
in implementation and then must be done in connection with other  
agreed language such as mission and values, and under the constraint  
of law.
a.