[blml] 'normal'

[gesta at tiscali.co.uk]

Grattan Endicott<gesta at tiscali.co.uk
[following address discontinued:
grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk]
********************************
"Small talk dies in agonies."
                     ~ Shelley
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brian" <bmeadows666 at gmail.com>
To: <blml at amsterdamned.org>
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 9:53 PM
Subject: Re: [blml] 'normal'


> On Fri, 9 Nov 2007 13:51:57 -0500
> Eric Landau <ehaa at starpower.net> wrote:
>
> 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.
>
+=+ You are in error if you think the 2007 Laws were not proof
read by appropriate eyes in plural locations and independent of the
drafting subcommittee. Not every step in the process is in the public
domain.  The risk in offering opportunity to blml subscribers would
have been that they would be inclined to involve themselves with principle
rather than language, and this is not the proof reader's function.
                                       ~ Grattan ~  +=+