At 09:18 AM 10/17/00 -0400, Joe wrote: >Okay, Tim, I'll buy that. I let my frustration get the better of >me on that one anyway. The language was too intemperate for which >I apologize. Accepted. >But what the Board needs more than anything else is solid >information upon which to base decisions on how to proceed with >filing for the service mark. We need a committee report with >"Objective", "Body" (discussion), "Conclusions" and "References". >That way the Board can follow the line of thinking and check for >themselves (using the References) on questionable conclusions. >There should also be room for a minority report and gag orders do >not promote this. Speaking only for myself, I agree that if someone wanted to provide a different conclusion ie minority report, they should be able to do so. However, I think that while a committee is in session that matters discussed within a committee should not be discussed on the various lists by the participants of those committees until after a report is issued. Once freed from committee representation they become one of the members of the group at large and are free to discuss whatever they want. Additionally I think that if it is asked that members not share private deliberations even after off the committee they should abide by that. As far as I know, no member of the Trademarks committee has discussed any item from the committee's discussions on the lists. Tim