On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Narendra Diwate <[email protected]> wrote: > The only thing that happens in a democracy are squabbling, delays, > indecision, wrong decisions and going with the tide so to speak. Thats not > good for any project. >
This is where i differ, the above is acceptable only to a certain extent and in a very limited context - "projects". Assume for a moment if the same theory were applied to "open source" and the argument would die a quick and untimely and rather pitiful death The adjectives then take on a different note - democracy becomes a willingness to allow multiple perspectives - squabbling becomes debate, delays become a need to consider options, indecision becomes being inclusive, wrong decisions still remain wrong decisions but wrong for some and not so wrong for others, going with the tide becomes majority decision (not always good for a democracy) and all this diversity is very good for a broad population of people and theories. "No democracy" means only gentoo or debian and no deriviatives - and this applies for any project. Just think if we still had to work with Linux versions that were not (excuse me for saying this) dumbed down for us ordinary users. Chances are Ubuntu would not have been the hot property that it is now. In the context of Ubuntu its a matter of time before there is a major split and there will be enough folks to start work on improving Ubuntu - there already are - like Mint, Ultimate, etc and however meritocratic Ubuntu wants to be they cannot stop that because Linux / Open Source is still democratic in its essence ram -- ubuntu-in mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
