This was taken from a longer reply to a different email. I think it may merit separate discussion. . Up to you folks.
Ben wrote: > I agree that votes can be useful, but I submit for > the record (again!) that for a group our size, they're far too much > overhead just to overrule the opinion of a single person. > [..] > My preference is for people > to agree to disagree and move on when they're outnumbered as that is > what happens in real life. _Most_ people already do this. When "a majority" of the group have spoken, this makes sense. However, "for a group our size", having even 3 or 4 people chime in on a technical issue, does not constitute a majority. It could be that the majority is actually against the 3 or 4. In contrast, if you think having things decided by a smaller number of people is "more efficient" or something, than having full membership votes, then I would suggest having a "technical board" put together, so that sort of thing could be worked out faster. In that sort of situation, if the tech board is X people, and (X/2)+1 agree on something, then it could be considered settled. I think the problem here might be that you may think that (you+personX+personY) already compose a "tech board", so if those people agree, you think everyone else should give way. To which I say, if you wish opencsw to work that way, then make the "tech board" a formal entity. Until then, the only really "everyone's opinion is equal" appropriate way to resolve deadlock, is a full vote, to make sure that everyone's opinion is equally heard. _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
