[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ddtp: new notifications mails, opt-in or opt-out?

On 06/10/01, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Christian Kurz wrote:
> > So you want to say that only the opionion of the people is counted that
> > participated in that lengthy discussion?

> If people don't voice an opinion by participating in the discussion
> it's hard to know what they think.

Oh, so I'm now forced to check every discussion taking part here on
debian-devel to find out if it's important and if I need to voice my
opinion or not? How many hours has a day for you? 

> > So, you want to have in the future discussions on this list
> > with 1000 mails and more, where all developers participate to have a
> > real consensus? 

> Consensus is not an exact thing, otherwise it would be a vote. If
> people don't raise their voice or don't vote there is not much we
> can do about that. Unfortunately that holds for a large number of

We can, by not talking about a consensus then, but about the majority of
people participating in that special threat on debian-devel. With having
just about 10-20 people taking active part in such a lengthy discussion
and having more then 800 developers, I'm against calling an informal
agreement made on debian-devel a consensus.

> people, both in Debian (look at the number of people who voted in
> the DPL elections) as for most governments.

Right, but still the number of people participating in the DPL vote is
much higher then the number of people following such a lengthy
discussion on debian-devel.

> I see this as a pretty simple decision: a number of people complained
> (loudly) that they received unwanted and unsollicited email over
> which they had no control. In reaction to that there was a discussion

Sorry, but this is wrong. They had some control over getting those
messages, but not as they liked. And also I'm against calling them
unwanted, because some people wanted them, which would be according to
your statement above, a consensus. And if they were really unsolicited
is also in my opinion debatable.

           Debian Developer (http://www.debian.org)
1024/26CC7853 31E6 A8CA 68FC 284F 7D16  63EC A9E6 67FF 26CC 7853

Attachment: pgpNHXfPHpSVV.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: