Uh, on the one hand, maybe that would be better. On the other, I think you’re overestimating how important responding to Roavin’s and Griffindor’s unanimity test question is. We, as a collective, discuss plenty of things together, including at times how to respond to questions or issues raised in the Assembly. But not every single question someone asks is going to prompt a discussion as soon as it’s asked, and consider how difficult it is to go through the process of consensus-testing the answer to each and every question the CRS is asked.
I’m not saying we did this perfectly—we definitely didn’t. I’m just trying to give a bit of perspective. At the end of the day, this is much ado about a very bizarre question that Roavin woke up and decided to make the litmus test of a nominee. Throughout this process, we’ve been transparent about the process and reasoning for the nominations, and no one has raised substantive concerns about the nomination of ProfessorHenn to the CRS, a nomination that we stand behind fully.
Because they didn’t feel it was necessary or didn’t have anything to add to the conversation? Which is not the grand sin you seem to think.
I’m afraid of many things including spiders, the dark, the ongoing climate crisis, my fantasy team losing, etc. This isn’t on the list.
That does not mean we should.
It’s worth noting, as a point of information, the CRS actually releases Sunshine reports, just like other government institutions.