Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
> Anton van Straaten wrote:
> > However, this SRFI was already way
> > over the alloted draft period.  I don't know the history of that - if
> > there's a procedural problem, it should have been addressed a long
> > time ago.  But it doesn't make much sense to me to suddenly start
> > calling for withdrawal ....
>
> In business, that's called "throwing good money after bad." In
> parenting, it's called "two wrongs don't make a right."

I don't think analogies are helpful here.  But if it makes you happy: if you
drive a car off the road, you have to do some more offroad driving to get
back on the road.  Turns out two wrongs *do* make a right, after all.

> I realize that you're trying to be tactful and diplomatic and offer a
> compromise here, but it won't help, because your compromise just
> undermines the process even more.

It wasn't intended as a compromise - it's an observation about what I think
is right.  I'm not suggesting that the draft period be extended
indefinitely, only that the situation be dealt with fairly.  I don't accept
that this undermines the process.

Anton