On May 14, 2013, at 6:00 PM, "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh(_at_)joelhalpern(_dot_)com>
wrote:
At the same time, discussions do have to be resolvable. If there is no way
to address it, then it is not a discuss. But "required to clar" is the wrong
picture as far as I can tell.
Exactly right. It would actually be pretty presumptuous for an AD to say what
is required to clear the DISCUSS. That would tend to imply that the DISCUSS
is a directive, not an invitation to, well, discuss. Of course we have to
_try_ to say what we think would clear the discuss, but I don't think we can go
beyond that; it's virtually impossible for us to have complete information.