Thus said "K. Fossil user" on Tue, 28 Jun 2016 20:51:29 -0000: > 1) if numbers count, then 5 is not sufficient in front of 519, and 519 > is not sufficient either in front of the numerous GIT users...
519 subscribers does not mean 519 humans. At any rate, how long should they be given to respond? If they never respond, does that mean that they agree or disagree with said proposed change? Given the implications of your terms, I would submit that this list should have never changed configuration in the first place, because a ``poll'' to discover whether or not the ``community'' supports such a change would likely have been as similarly ignored by 500+- subscribers. Do you agree that the majority of people who decided to respond to the thread about the mailing list change were in favor of restoring the original behavior? Do you think that further discussion on this matter will sway the rest of the non-responders to speak up? > I've just say : "let people choose if they want to show anything about > them or not". Even that makes people angry (really ? You, people, are > angry about privacy ?). Are people not already able to choose? Must they depend on the mailing list to provide the privacy they seek? Thanks, Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 4000000057742669 _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
