From the list custodian re: art. II, sec. 1 issues

[Volokh, Eugene]

        The discussion on art. II, sec. 1 has been extremely thoughtful and
substantive -- in my view, an excellent example of how valuable on-line
conversations can be.  Nonetheless, I wonder if, after what is probably over
100 posts on this subject alone, most of the key points might have already
been adequately made; and if that's so, whether it might be worthwhile for
all the discussion participants to just summarize their main points and
perhaps leave the matter at that.

        One advantage of such an approach, I think, is that other list
members might actually pay more attention to this sort of
one-from-each-person-and-that's-that summary than they might be to the much
higher-traffic thread.  Another advantage is that it might decrease the
total volume of discussion, which I'm afraid might be at an unmanageable
level for many readers.  A third advantage is that even some thread
participants might feel rather swamped by the volume of conversation.

        *If* thread participants agree with me on this, then I thought that
perhaps they might submit a post summarizing their essential points
(preferably *not* responding to others' summary posts, since then people
will feel the need to file reply briefs), and then leave the matter at rest.
On the other hand, if I'm mistaken, and if there is more enlightenment that
can be had out of continuing conversation on this matter, then I will
happily stand back and allow the thread to continue -- I certainly do not
want to be overassertive on this point, especially since the quality of the
discussion has without doubt been extremely high.

        Eugene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/private/conlawprof/attachments/20001205/35f88c0e/attachment.htm