Hi, On Sun, 2018-04-22 at 13:06 +0000, Carlos Soriano wrote: > Another thing I want to mention is that I honestly cannot see this > proposal to have happen if it was not done with a specific set of > people that has invested so much into the big picture of what a CoC > conveys. I don't think is realistic to try to create a document as > difficult as this one with 200 people commenting around (or any other > proposal for that matter).
An important reason for my Referendum proposal is exactly to avoid a lot of people bickering over a single proposal. I do think that a single proposal can work well if it is well designed so that a large majority of the community will back it. However, I personally doubt that the current proposal finds the right balances for this to be the case. And if it doesn't, it could exactly trigger the described situation with a lot of people commenting. In contrast, by allowing multiple independent proposals to compete, each can be edited on its own creating separate and productive working environments. This would happen in small groups which can learn from each other and most community members would not directly participate in this process. Doing a Referendum is then a simple selection mechanism that finds the proposal which best fits the community. I do see disadvantages with a Referendum. But I do believe that it is a reasonably sane solution. One which specifically avoids both endless discussions and people ending up feeling ignored. Benjamin
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list email@example.com https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list