Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge
Florian Weimer wrote:
> Petter Reinholdtsen <email@example.com> writes:
>> Well, there is another explanation around as well, which at least a
>> few of the people I talked to on IRC verified. Several of these
>> people did not realize that the change was substantial, because there
>> were no rationale or explanation included in the vote document, and
>> the title of the vote claimed that the change was only editorial.
>> So perhaps they cared, but were not aware of the issue?
> In this case you should have voted "further discussion".
> Of course, such behavior has a tendency to stifle progress. Given
> that there was so little discussion leading up to the vote, I think it
> was appropriate in this case.
Oh, there were *years* of discussion. If you weren't listening, well,
There are none so blind as those who will not see.