On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Andrea Faulds <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 06/01/14 19:26, Hannes Magnusson wrote: > >> - The author of the RFC can no longer bribe and "convince" individual >> person to change his/hers vote >> > > I'm unconvinced "bribery" exists. What I do know exists is that people who > make RFCs will contact people who voted No to try and see how they can > improve the RFC to be more to their liking. I can't see how this could be a > bad thing. > > Agreed. I believe it was completely inappropriate for this change to have been made unilaterally without a vote or even discussion. To suggest that we should now discuss whether to revert it would be like implementing a new feature without any discussion then proposing an RFC to remove it.
Please revert the change immediately. We can then discuss the merits of it and vote on it as an RFC. If you have the better argument, then it will pass. But making such a drastic change that affects the entire voting process unilaterally would set a precedent that completely undermines the whole point of having a voting process in the first place. --Kris
