Re: Constitutional amendment: reduce the length of DPL election process
* Pierre Habouzit (madcoder@debian.org) [070804 13:40]:
> Handwaving. If the silent majority wants to oppose an apparent
> consensus, they should not be silent in the first place. Voting brings
> decisions into the hands of people that did not necessarily followed
> discussions, or are unaware of some of the issues.
Though I agree on most parts, I consider it necessary that all
Developers together can pull any decision into their hands - even if
that might yield suboptimal results in some cases. But as someone else
already said, democracy is the best of all bad governance methods but
unfortunatly there is not a single good governance method. (And I'm
going to fight for that right, btw - in Debian and outside.)
Having said that, I agree that in most cases calling for GR is
contraproductive, and having an overemphasize on GRs is hurting the
project. GRs don't magically fix things, and often leave wounds.
I know there are exceptions, e.g. I consider one of the votes of the
tech ctte on the question whether something is RC or not as helpful, as
all reasonings were said, and Steve and I disagreed, so that was the
"fastest" way out, and we both welcomed that we will have a decision
(and voted "further discussion" lowest).
So, in cases where the project needs to have a common opinion, but we
have a wide range of opinions even though all reasons are said, a vote
might finish the discussion - this of course helps only really good in
case all sides accept that the vote is "the final decision" (and in that
case, we could equally well e.g. use the TC for a decision, or anything
else as long as all involved people are accepting the result in the
end).
Cheers,
Andi
--
http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
Reply to: