I would like to humbly suggest that recent discussions attempting to define the scope, value, relevance, importance, etc. of groups other than one's own for the purpose of devaluing that other group's influence in the community processes are counterproductive. It drives the community apart and send members/participants back to their corners. It also tends to undermine confidence in our processes and our outcomes -- by members/participants and by observers. If we want to have a rational discourse about this, I think we would need to set some rather different ground rules for it to be productive. Right now, this seems more suited for the playground, locker room or bar (depending on what one is comparing), rather than a "constitutional congress." Finally, we may have hurt the feelings of the ASO, since no one has taken a shot at them (yet). I'm sure they feel quite left out. In all seriousness, I suggest we either put these discussions aside or find a more productive and less corrosive way to frame them. Greg