On Apr 23, 2015, at 5:08 PM, Garrett Wollman <wollman@csail.mit.edu> wrote:
<<On Thu, 23 Apr 2015 21:34:36 +0300, Dzmitry Kazimirchyk <dkazimirchyk@gmail.com> said:
I am having impression that many of the "for MSK" arguments are invented only to defend the questionable decision made not so long ago.
I agree.
I know that Paul wants to "avoid politics" but in this case he has imposed a very sensitive and inherently political choice, which the "people on the ground" have made it clear to us is undesired.
No, I think what he’s doing is refusing to make any changes whose reasoning is political, which makes sense. The problem is that it would open the floodgates to all sort of stuff we don’t need, like debates about what country certain towns are in, or what countries exist, and so forth. paul