Re: Reforming the NM process
On 25 Apr 2006, Panu Kalliokoski verbalised:
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 01:14:55PM +0000, Thaddeus H. Black wrote:
>> The fallacy in the argument, in my view, is in the implicit
>> proposition that votes build productive communities. This simply
>> is not so. You
>
> I agree totally and I don't think I ever claimed otherwise. Most
> things are better settled with discussion. Given that anyone can
> participate in the discussions of Debian, it would seem sensible
> that anyone could participate in the votes. For me, the point of
> broadening the voting rights is to increase the openness of the
> project, which I expect to increase contribution.
You have not yet proved your thesis that either opening the
decision making process to the unwashed masses, including people who
have lottle or no commitment to the project, would actually improve
the decisions, and secondly, that being able to take part in a poll
actually improves participation.
Arguable, I would say the hypothesis that it would reduce
participation is equally valid (people feel voting is important [this
discussion is proof], people want to vote, only way to vote is to
contribute, so people join NM)
/. like polls (which is what your voting idea sounds like) do
not help make /. code better. I do not see how getting a larger, less
involved voting population would mean things improve for the end
users.
There is also the atlas shrugged factor: since
non-contributors far outnumber contributors, votes may mean that
people who do not contribute apart from voting get to tell people who
do the work how to work. I can live with that -- my rate for doing
so is $250/hour, since then I would not be working for me and people
like me in a joint venture, I would be working for a set of bosses
who vote.
manoj
--
It's always darkest just before the lights go out. Alex Clark
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: