On 22 August 2014 14:42, Marc A. Pelletier <m...@uberbox.org> wrote:

> Part of the difficulty of that statement is that the very /definition/
> of "good enough" will necessarily vary from individual to individual,
> with a non-zero segment of editors defining it as "absolutely perfect
> and matching /my/ requirements exactly" (and another, just as large
> segment, calling for "any improvement to X is a gain").

Just recently I had someone seriously claim "bah, if Flow doesn't
include [obscure feature I like] it won't be fit for purpose" in all

> Regardless of one's opinions on the "power dynamics" of the situation,
> or on how to best serve the short- and long-term needs of the community,
> it seems to me evident that you cannot allow any one segment of the
> community what amounts to veto power to any attempts at improvement.

I think it's indisputably clear that, no matter the level of and
efforts toward consultation, people will loudly claim it wasn't

- d.

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Reply via email to