[CCWG-ACCT] Call(s) on Thursday

[Nigel Roberts]

Jordan

In all good will, I'm genuinely puzzled. It seems to me that you are 
being either naive or disingenuous in below statement.

I refer to Chris Lahatte's statement on a procedural point that is 
anything but dull.

If there is a dearth of time for review, that is exactly when the major 
changes are slipped in, that are often not noticed until after its too late.

So while I will 100% accept that the below description is possible, and 
even very like to be correct, running the show in this way is 
procedurally unfair as it excludes oversight and does not *ensure*, in a 
transparent way that nothing is being sprung on anyone.

Put another way, I have to take your (or someone else's) word for it.


> I'll close with a quite dull procedural point - the documents that you are
> not getting much time to review for these calls are generally a) making
> tiny, incremental changes from previous versions, and b) have been
> substantially the same for weeks. Nothing is being "sprung" on anyone right
> now.