Re: Proposed Justification Letter

[MATHIS@USC-ISIF.ARPA]

Scott (and the rest of cl-iso),

Dick's version was too lengthy and in someway made being left out
even harder to take.  I don't think we should send any such
message to the general mailing lists at this point.  If we each
get individual inquiries, then for the moment let's handle them
individually.  (Carl Hewitt called me the day before the message
went out just to find out what was happening.  I told him we had
taken a "conservative" approach to naming new members to these
committees since X3J13 could reconsitute them and redefine their
tasks.  At this point slow growth in the size of the committees
was important.)

Scott's reply to Fateman is about right.  I might combine points
3 and 4 and then not number them, but I think that's purely a
matter of style.  I would suggest he just send it to him
personally with only blind copies to anybody else.  If somebody
puts a negative message out to the whole community, we would
handle it differently.

I have begun a list of people that I want to be sure are informed
of the progress of the X3J13 proposal and committee.  It is only
fair that when we put people off by saying they can participate
in the X3J13 committee that we then make an effort to keep them
informed of that work.  If anyone has suggestions for that list,
please send them to me.

-- Bob