Dear Co-Chairs, I remain confused by Thomas' advice.
From the charter:
The Chair(s) shall be responsible for designating each position as having one of the following designations: a) Full Consensus - a position where no minority disagrees; identified by an absence of objection b) Consensus - a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree I quite doubt that we shall need advice from our legal SubTeam what EACH POSITION means. [...] In the absence of Full Consensus, the Chair(s) should allow for the submission of minority viewpoint(s) and these, along with the consensus view, shall be included in the report. [...] I quite doubt that we shall need advice from our legal SubTeam whether an interim report is a report. Oh, this reminds me, I want to join the Legal SubTeam. greetings, el On 2015-04-20 14:54, Thomas Rickert wrote:
Dear Eberhard, it is not foreseen in our charter to have minority views for other scenarios than the consensus recommendations. I suggest you use the public comment period to voice your concerns or indicate your preference where our report is providing options as I am sure many of the colleagues in the CCWG and their respective groups will do.
Thomas
--- rickert.net <http://rickert.net> [...] -- Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar) el@lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell) PO Box 8421 \ / Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/