On 04/30/2015 11:23 PM, David Golden wrote:
I'll accept his statement that his way of expressing his point of view
is innocent rather than malicious.
It really does not matter to me whether my expression is seen as
malicious. What is of paramount and exclusive importance to me is that
my message and position are:
- unambiguously put within a public record
- not being coopted
It nonetheless implies (a) that few obstacles remain
I am claiming exactly this. A hastily put together list of 5 points,
without a hint of a mechanism of adding new points *is* for all intents
and purposes "few obstacles remain".
and (b) everyone agrees about that
"Agreement" is a fluid concept. For example the entirety of my voting
during the T::B discussion was of the form (sourced from [1]) "a member
feels a proposal endangers the organization or its participants, or
violates the mission of the organization". Yet everyone I asked was
under the impression that I considered the list a sufficient starting
point. I accept that this is my fault - I didn't assess the climate at
the time well enough. In retrospect the only way to fully register my
position was to literally walk out of the room.
With that being said the situation as *I* see it is:
- The original list was put together under duress (in the form of time
pressure)[2]
- The list was ratified by a U-1 consensus
- Possibility of a future modifications to the list were not discussed
at any time during the "official part", making the list effectively
immutable.
Please let me know what about the process and results did I
mischaracterize/misrepresent.
(or that no one cares)
I maintain that no one cares *nearly enough*. I can elaborate on this on
further request, though I do not consider doing so productive.
... and what I think makes for a constructive conversation about code.
The conversation is *not* about a spherical hunk of code in a vacuum.
Deliberately avoiding discussion of the goals and personalities driving
towards these goals is what put is in this mess in the first place.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making
[2] "Consent must be genuine and cannot be obtained by force, duress or
fraud." also from [1]
