1 |
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com> wrote: |
2 |
> Condorcet should be dev wide imo, rather than council. I'm certainly |
3 |
> not of the belief we should do group wide votes on every decision, but |
4 |
> this sort of thing is likely to generally piss people off and not have |
5 |
> any clear majority on its own- thus would go that route. |
6 |
|
7 |
Frankly, this really strikes me as one of those situations where |
8 |
resolving it by some kind of majority vote among many options is |
9 |
probably the worst possible way to resolve it. |
10 |
|
11 |
If we narrow it down to one or two items and there is a consensus |
12 |
among the Council that either is fine and it comes down to religious |
13 |
preference, then a limited dev-wide vote might at least settle the |
14 |
debate. However, I wouldn't just throw the 47 options in the email |
15 |
chains into some huge list and have everybody rank them. |
16 |
|
17 |
It probably wouldn't hurt to have the Council members hash this out to |
18 |
some extent before going into a meeting. If the only time you discuss |
19 |
this is 20 minutes per month you'll never make a decision. By all |
20 |
means hash it out on -project or on an email alias if noise is too |
21 |
great. Perhaps post updates to -project if the latter is used, and |
22 |
let everybody influence the debate indirectly through the Council. |
23 |
|
24 |
I think just about every line of argument has already been hashed out |
25 |
over the last few years. The council members just need to go over the |
26 |
debate and form a consensus. Using a vote to solicit feedback is |
27 |
fine, but I wouldn't use it as a substitute for discussion and forming |
28 |
consensus. |
29 |
|
30 |
Rich |