On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 20:20:41 +0200, Stas Malyshev <smalys...@sugarcrm.com>
wrote:
Putting aside the fact that democracy has very little to do with what
we're trying to do here (we're not government, we're opensource
project), that's how democracy *doesn't work*. As you noticed, it is
"too bad", and it is exactly the problem we're having - without
participation, votes are decided by a random sample of whoever bothered
to appear, often on a single vote.
This is not a way to build consensus. It is a very unhealthy state of
things, and it only contributes to the image of PHP as a project having
no direction, no governance and basically existing in a state of
brownian motion. I thought we were trying to shed this image.
I honestly don't see what the problem is. If the sample is indeed random,
there's no bias as to what the voters as whole would do, tough for close
votes or for votes where very few people vote the result could differ.
But most importantly, I would prefer that the people voting actually
thought hard about the proposal. And it's more likely (I think) that
people who invested time in that process and in the discussion actually
voted. So this way we get more knowledgeable voters on average than if,
say, 90% of the people voted (because a large part of the voting
population doesn't care about many of the proposals).
In fact, I think that in this model, we still get a lot of people that
vote without a clue; a model with an elected committee could make more
sense.
--
Gustavo Lopes
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
