From: Dean Snyder (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Jul 07 2005 - 10:22:46 CDT
Peter Constable wrote at 7:07 AM on Thursday, July 7, 2005:
>> From: Dean Snyder [mailto:email@example.com]
>> >Suppose there has *never* been an instance in which WG2 rejected a
>> >UTC recommendation. What would you derive from that?
>> I would assert that the burden of proof is on you and others to
>> establish that the WG2 is not a rubber stamp of the UTC.
>Ah, so you would derive that WG2 is a rubber stamp. That is not at all a
>valid logical conclusion.
Based on what facts?
And anyway who has said it is a logical conclusion; actually I would
consider it very strong circumstantial evidence.
>So, you'd put the burden on me (or whomever) to establish this is not
>the case. Why? Who's conducting an inquiry and why? Is this needed for
>some criminal investigation? Or simply to satisfy the whims of certain
It's very simple - in this forum Erkki Kolehmainen made the bald
statement, "it would be grossly unfair and misleading to characterize it
as a rubberstamping organization". If the facts are that WG2 approves,
let's say, 98% of UTC recommendations, then, as I continue to say, the
burden of proof is on those who would assert that it is not a de facto
Dean A. Snyder
Assistant Research Scholar
Manager, Digital Hammurabi Project
Computer Science Department
Whiting School of Engineering
218C New Engineering Building
3400 North Charles Street
Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore, Maryland, USA 21218
office: 410 516-6850
cell: 717 817-4897
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 07 2005 - 11:34:24 CDT