Dear colleagues, 

There are a number of cases where both we and another Generation Panel have concluded that a pair of code points should be a cross-script variant.  However, the IP indicates that it has come around to the view that it is not necessary that both GPs do so for every cross-script variant.  Accordingly, I think our default position should be, essentially, 

Simply put, I do not feel that going back over all of the cross-script pairs would be a worthwhile use of our time. 

Now there may be some cases where we do wish to object, perhaps because it results in an in-script variant which we have a problem with.  But it seems to me that should be the exception.  And that the threshold for us actually pushing back should be fairly high -- something on the order of: 5 of 7 of us see a problem. 

My opinion is that there would be a problem if a language or languages used by a significant portion of the Latin script user population 

a) includes both code points, 

b) uses those two points to differentiate between a significant number of relatively common words

Otherwise, I favor just accepting what results from transitivity and moving on.