Berry, thanks for some excellent work on this. I support the position with the following changes. Clarity I believe the outside world will find difficulty in distinguishing between BC WG members in a minority and a BC position. We need some clarity here. Let me try. The WG model allows anyone to join. There will be members of the WG who happen to be BC members but who do not claim to represent the BC. Their view should not appear in a BC paper. (General point for the BC EXCOMM: The BC should have an internal process to distinguish its delegates to a WG from any one else who happens to join a WG). Regardless of the existence of the WG, what we are now writing is a BC position paper. So in any case we should delete any references to the views of the BC members on the WG. (If the views of BC members on the WG are informative put that in an internal BC email and say who is saying what.) Hope this helps. Philip