[blml] 'normal'

[Brian]

On Fri, 9 Nov 2007 13:51:57 -0500
Eric Landau <ehaa at starpower.net> wrote:

> 
> Perhaps someone might also suggest (I would do so myself did I not  
> lack the standing, not being a member of any of the WBF's privy  
> councils) and submit for consideration that the reinterpretations  
> that appear in the Appendix be perused by some otherwise uninvolved  
> pairs of eyes prior to finalization, lest the WBF subsequently  
> discover the need to submit re-reinterpretations for coverage in the  
> not-yet-to-be-forthcoming (fifthcoming?) Appendix to the Appendix.
> 

As should have happened with the Laws themselves - but now I'll be
accused of doubting John Wignall's qualifications again, or possibly
some other member of the WBFLC. Final proof reads *have* to be
undertaken by someone uninvolved with the drafting. Those involved with
the drafting will have too great a tendency to read what they "know" is
there, rather than what's actually there. The excuse about the
potential to be swamped with comments from a wider consultation is pure
BS. If the will was there, a way of filtering out the rubbish and just
passing on the important points could easily be found. I'm sure an
appeal to the BLML readership would result in quite a number of
volunteers, for starters. 


Brian. 

--