On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 11:52:43AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote: > The default option is a status quo which includes the fact that we have > an issue we're trying to resolve. This is not the same thing as claiming > that there is no issue to be resolved. > > There might be a better way of saying this. Possibly. My concern is that people will misunderstand "the default option is a status quo which includes the fact that we have an issue we're trying to resolve" as "the default option is a status quo". I.e., it is not appropriate to rank "FURTHER DISCUSSION" highest when one means "WE'LL KEEP NON-FREE *FOREVER*! AND IT'LL GET AS BIG AS IT NEEDS TO! NOW SHUT UP AND GO AWAY AND MAKE YOUR OWN PROJECT, YOU THOUGHTLESS BURNING BIGOTED STALLMAN-LOVING GPL ZEALOTS!".[1] It's not appropriate because "FURTHER DISCUSSION" can't actually express that complex or strongly-felt a sentiment. If an equivalent option is not available on the ballot, one ranks FURTHER DISCUSSION highest because one hopes to revisit the issue very soon, with an option on the ballot that expresses one's position. I misunderstood it that way myself, when I objecting to Anthony Town's proposed alternative to John Goerzen's General Resolution in 2000. I'm not a *deliberately* obtuse person[2], so it may be that other people share the misconception. It may be resolvable simply by having more instructions on the ballot. [1] This is, of course, a completely contrived and hypothetical example. [2] :) -- G. Branden Robinson | The key to being a Southern Debian GNU/Linux | Baptist: It ain't a sin if you branden@debian.org | don't get caught. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Anthony Davidson
Attachment:
pgpv0PaHx84Wr.pgp
Description: PGP signature