Re: What your ballot should look like if you're in favor of releasing sarge
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 00:41:04 -0500, Steve Langasek <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> I have no intention of telling people which option should be their
> preferred option; indeed, I myself question whether September is far
> enough away to let us release before then, because we've lost a lot
> of momentum over the last month and a half while this has been
> hanging over our heads. But it is precisely because of the momentum
> being lost that I think it's hard for us to do *worse* than the
> status quo, which is why I still plan to vote choice 1 above the
> default option -- along with choices 2, 3, 4, and 5. If you agree
> with me that the release of sarge is already long overdue, I
> encourage you to do likewise.
> And if you have already voted, I would also remind you that the
> Debian voting system does allow you to change your vote any time up
> until the close of the polling period.
I must confess to being surprised by the numbers of negatives
on the ballots being posted to places like planet.debian.org. I
would like people to consider this: back in the halcyon days of
yore, myth has it that we used to try for rough consensus. Now that
that oractice is slowly going out of fashion, and we have
substituted majority rules and votes for discussion, voting just
ones preferred option above further discussion implies that one is
not willing to even think about compromise; if my way does not win,
then we do nothing.
This predilection for not moving an iota from a preferred
position would lead to "Further Discussion" winning in this vote;
which may not be the desired option.
I have voted options I consider suboptimal, but still better
than sitting on our hands, above the default option. I use this
exercise (which I also use for DPL elections): before I rank an
option below the default option, I mentally prepare myself to look
at the sponsor of that option in the eye and say to their face
"Dude, your option sucks. Indeed, there are a list of reasons why
implementing it would be bad for Debian". If I can't bring myself to
say that, I rank the option above the default, albeit at the bottom
of the list of acceptable options.
It we can't work towards rough consensus anymore, could we
still vote in a fashion that allows for solutions that may not be
optimal in our view, but are still those we can live with?
There is, in fact, no reason to believe that any given natural
phenomenon, however marvelous it may seem today, will remain forever
inexplicable. Soon or late the laws governing the production of life
itself will be discovered in the laboratory, and man may set up
business as a creator on his own account. The thing, indeed, is not
only conceivable; it is even highly probable. Mencken, 1930
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C