Hi Tim Le dim. 17 août 2025 à 16:43, Tim Düsterhus <t...@bastelstu.be> a écrit :
> Hi > > I just opened the vote for the "'Abstain' voting option for RFCs" policy > RFC: > > RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/rfc_vote_abstain > Discussion: https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/128185 > PR: https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/128185 > > As with every RFC, a 2/3 majority is required. Voting ends 2025-08-31 at > 15:00:00 UTC. > > The vote already includes the “Abstain” option to dogfood the RFC and to > showcase how the voting widget will look like should the RFC be > accepted. Although it could be argued that selecting the “Abstain” > option would be a vote in favor of having such an option, it will be > considered an abstention. Please vote “Yes” if you are in favor of the > RFC :-) Thanks for putting this RFC together. I’ve been torn on the topic, but I ultimately decided to vote against it because I’m not comfortable with the possible “tracking” aspect. At the moment, it’s not possible to tell whether someone didn’t vote because they were undecided or simply because they moved on to something else at the time. As you note in the RFC, selecting “abstain” should be interpreted the same as “didn’t vote”. However, once explicit abstention becomes part of the recorded stats, that changes the dynamic: we’d be tracking a choice that was previously invisible. To me, that only makes sense in a representative context, where voters hold a mandate. In our setting, I think it might better to avoid opening that door. Cheers, Nicolas
