Re: "Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge" or "Debian commits suicide"
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 11:21:00PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> >
> > The GR was intended to clarify the meaning in line with the opinion
> > held by the vast majority,
>
> That's drivel. You don't have a clue what the vast majority think - 80%
> of developers didn't express an opinion. You can't assume that they
> agreed or disagreed; you simply have no evidence either way.
that is false. we know very well what 80% of the developers think: ``It
is not important enough for me to act upon.'' we have very good evidence
of this also, if you are a developer, and name is not on this list:
http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/gr_editorial_voters.txt
then you did not care. 'Nuff said.
perhaps Nathanael was limiting his statement to the set of caring
developers. perhaps he was using statistical methods to extrapolate the
opinion of the majority. if the latter, a sample size of 20% is very
large. i am not a statistician, so perhaps a real statistician would
like to give a margin of error on this poll.
also remember, that everyone that voted for the ammendment agreed with
the meaning behind hte amendment, but not everyone that voted against it
disagreed with the meaning. perhaps we (i am one) disagreed with the
actual wording.
a box of kleenex: hardware
a digitial picture of a box of kleenex: software
a thought about a digitial picture of a box of kleenex: wetware
--
John H. Robinson, IV jaqque@debian.org
http ((((
WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above, sbih.org ( )(:[
as apparently my cats have learned how to type. spiders.html ((((
Reply to: